OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 21, 2014, 03:02:52 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: List of terms of reunion with the Roman Catholics  (Read 10848 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« on: August 17, 2011, 01:04:50 PM »

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 01:11:37 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,478


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2011, 01:10:35 PM »

So basically this will never happen except through Divine Intervention Smiley

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Andrew Crook
formerly known as AveChriste11
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 523



« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2011, 01:10:48 PM »

I think numbers #1 through 4 represent the main stumbling blocks.  If we were to ever work past those, then all of the other things which you mentioned would naturally be done away much quicker for a unity with the Orthodox.  Although I don't see how #12, or #5 make any difference whatsoever -- in regards to the Filioque as long as we understand that it does not carry the same meaning in Greek, as it does in Latin.  The Papal claims are more of an issue than the Filioque is..

I also honestly don't "get" #28 about Kneeling/Prostrating -- that doesn't seem to be a very serious obstacle to reunion.  Every culture that Christianity has come across had different ways of worshipping God.  I think we should allow the Latin Catholics to keep some of their cultural heritage as long as it does not compromise the faith. 
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 01:12:48 PM by AveChriste11 » Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2011, 01:13:47 PM »

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)

Traditional forms according to whom? This is silly.

Quote
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy

A pre-schism Latin tradition.

Quote
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread

Also acceptable.

Quote
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh

You'll be disappointed to learn that this happens in Orthodox monasteries too.

Quote
19.   Sitting during worship

We may not like it, but is this really something to raise to a deal-breaker?

Quote
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means

Like it or not, we did that too.

Quote
21.   Legalistic theology

You'll have a hard time defining what exactly you mean and also proving that it hasn't been done to some degree in the Orthodox Church.

Quote
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)

Seriously? This is one of those nitpicks like "icons are written, not painted" that is actually just bogus.

Quote
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)

Another common Orthodox tradition.

Quote
27.   Use of statues ecclesiastically

Where are the universal canons against this?

Quote
28.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays

Get the GOA to stop first.

Why do you want to raise more barriers than there already are?
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2011, 01:14:05 PM »

I think numbers #1 through 4 represent the main stumbling blocks.  If we were to ever work past those, then all of the other things which you mentioned would naturally be done away much quicker for a unity with the Orthodox.  Although I don't see how #12, or #5 make any difference whatsoever -- in regards to the Filioque as long as we understand that it does not carry the same meaning in Greek, as it does in Latin.  The Papal claims are more of an issue than the Filioque is..

The problem is, we can't even say the Spirit proceeds "through" the Son as through the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son. So in any aspect, the Filioque cannot even be a theologoumena. I forgot which podcast it was, but there was a podcast that explained this extremely well, it might have been Fr. Thomas Hopko...
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: 37,960



« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2011, 01:17:38 PM »

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)

Traditional forms according to whom? This is silly.

Quote
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy

A pre-schism Latin tradition.
Condemned before the schism.

Quote
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread

Also acceptable.

Quote
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh

You'll be disappointed to learn that this happens in Orthodox monasteries too.

Quote
19.   Sitting during worship

We may not like it, but is this really something to raise to a deal-breaker?

Quote
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means

Like it or not, we did that too.

Quote
21.   Legalistic theology

You'll have a hard time defining what exactly you mean and also proving that it hasn't been done to some degree in the Orthodox Church.

Quote
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)

Seriously? This is one of those nitpicks like "icons are written, not painted" that is actually just bogus.

Quote
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)

Another common Orthodox tradition.

Not a dogma on penalty of hellfire.

Quote
27.   Use of statues ecclesiastically

Where are the universal canons against this?

Quote
28.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays

Get the GOA to stop first.

Why do you want to raise more barriers than there already are?
He's just listing them, not raising them. Though I don't agree with them all, I have seen them raised, some as long ago as a millenium ago, before 1054.
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
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2011, 01:18:15 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Amen! Great least, we really appreciate the effort, much like with the OO-EO discussions, we should very much elucidate our misunderstood glossary conflicts, as often we are saying the same things in different ways.  I pray this thread and OP start a productive discussion on these matters, that we can elucidate the mutual definitions of each point within Orthodox and Roman Catholic, and see our sames more so than our differences, and also learn to mutually understand each others' perspective with respect, tolerance, and Christian love.


I'll start:

Original Sin:

While in Orthodox we do not maintain the concept or doctrine of Original Sin in exactly the same mathematical precision which the RC theologians have elaborated, surely in a practical, Scriptural, and Traditional sense we agree on the similar premise that our progenitors Adam and Eve committed the first "Sin" and this "Sin" had irrevocably been introduced to the common human experience.  Further, this "Sin" is now become almost inherent to our human nature, and we require the Grace of the Mysteries to bridge this gap of Sin and reconnect our lives with God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  There are mechanical and logistical differences to be sure, and the Mariological implications are also different, but these become as similar a semantics debates as Christology.  

I'd say that Original Sin is a concept easily reconcilable between RC and Orthodox in God's Grace and a prayerful effort on our parts.
The problem is, we can't even say the Spirit proceeds "through" the Son as through the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son. So in any aspect, the Filioque cannot even be a theologoumena. I forgot which podcast it was, but there was a podcast that explained this extremely well, it might have been Fr. Thomas Hopko...

This is semantics, in Essence the Holy Spirit IS the Father, so regardless of the concepts of Source, Sender, and Sent, (which are mechanics discussions) we both mutually agree in ESSENCE and NATURE that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are ONE God, and are Consubstantial to each Person within the Mystery of the Trinity.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 01:22:45 PM by HabteSelassie » Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2011, 01:24:06 PM »

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)

Traditional forms according to whom? This is silly.

Traditional forms according to Orthodoxy. Thankfully the westernized icons are disappearing in Greece, and hopefully that will continue in Russia as well. I know that devil Czar Peter I had a lot to do with it in Russia, but I dunno if they existed in Orthodoxy prior to him.

Quote
Quote
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy

A pre-schism Latin tradition.
And that makes it right? Like it says... Mandatory. There is nothing wrong with clerical celibacy as long as a Priest is permitted to be married and not required to be celibate.

Quote
Quote
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread

Also acceptable.
Not really either, there are Orthodox Saints and Councils condemning this practice.

Quote
Quote
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh

You'll be disappointed to learn that this happens in Orthodox monasteries too.
Yes I am, and it should not happen. Just because some Orthodox do does it make it okay? No, certainly not. Its a disgusting, heretical practice.

Quote
Quote
19.   Sitting during worship

We may not like it, but is this really something to raise to a deal-breaker?
Not all of these are deal breakers, but are things that they will have to do to become Orthodox again.

Quote
Quote
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means

Like it or not, we did that too.
Your point? I've actually seen Roman Catholics defending both the Crusades and the Inquisitions.

Quote
Quote
21.   Legalistic theology

You'll have a hard time defining what exactly you mean and also proving that it hasn't been done to some degree in the Orthodox Church.
You should know what I'm talking about here. The West has used extremely legalistic theology, it has to return to the Orthodox form, and stop being so legalistic about many things. Of course, a lot of this comes from St. Augustine's errors and the use of Latin (a very "legal" language), but its still wrong.

Quote
Quote
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)

Seriously? This is one of those nitpicks like "icons are written, not painted" that is actually just bogus.
Not necessarily talking about the use of the words, but rather how they are understood in each church.

Quote
Quote
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)

Another common Orthodox tradition.
Really? Tell me where we officially believe that Mary was assumed into heaven prior to her death? Orthodoxy has always maintained that she had to die, that she did die, and only afterwards was her body assumed into heaven.

Quote
Quote
27.   Use of statues ecclesiastically

Where are the universal canons against this?
You'll notice I removed this from the list, I didn't notice I hadn't already removed it.

Quote
Quote
28.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays

Get the GOA to stop first.
And we should...

Quote
Why do you want to raise more barriers than there already are?

I'm not, i'm bringing up legitimate barriers and errors by the Roman Catholic Church. Not all are deal-breakers, but all will need to change.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 01:26:24 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Andrew Crook
formerly known as AveChriste11
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 523



« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2011, 01:27:38 PM »

I think numbers #1 through 4 represent the main stumbling blocks.  If we were to ever work past those, then all of the other things which you mentioned would naturally be done away much quicker for a unity with the Orthodox.  Although I don't see how #12, or #5 make any difference whatsoever -- in regards to the Filioque as long as we understand that it does not carry the same meaning in Greek, as it does in Latin.  The Papal claims are more of an issue than the Filioque is..

The problem is, we can't even say the Spirit proceeds "through" the Son as through the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son. So in any aspect, the Filioque cannot even be a theologoumena. I forgot which podcast it was, but there was a podcast that explained this extremely well, it might have been Fr. Thomas Hopko...

Perhaps you didn't word what you wanted to say accurately? No one ever said anything about proceeding through the Father.  Also, Father Thomas Hopko is just a priest -- and these things haven't been officially decided yet.  There are other Orthodox who do not feel it is such an issue, (i.e. Metropolitan Kallistos Ware).  It was created to deal with the Arians in Spain, and it worked -- now we can all move on to better things.. because the Greeks, Russians, and Antiochians will never have to say the Filioque in the Nicene Creed.  There would be no "Pope" to enforce such a thing.. because that would've disappeared by reunion.  
Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2011, 01:29:40 PM »

The problem is, we can't even say the Spirit proceeds "through" the Son as through the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son. So in any aspect, the Filioque cannot even be a theologoumena. I forgot which podcast it was, but there was a podcast that explained this extremely well, it might have been Fr. Thomas Hopko...

This is semantics, in Essence the Holy Spirit IS the Father, so regardless of the concepts of Source, Sender, and Sent, (which are mechanics discussions) we both mutually agree in ESSENCE and NATURE that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are ONE God, and are Consubstantial to each Person within the Mystery of the Trinity.

But the Filioque is still an issue that has to be defended against.

A VERY good podcast by Fr. Thomas Hopko regarding the Filioque:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/hopko/the_filioque
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 #10 on: August 17, 2011, 01:30:38 PM »

Although I don't see how #12, or #5 make any difference whatsoever...

With regards to 12:

Quote
Part of what icons are in the East is easier to understand in light of what happened to icons in the West, not only religious artwork but painting as a whole. What happens if you ask an art historian to tell the story of Western art after the Middle Ages, roughly from the Renaissance to the Neo-classicists?

The story that is usually told is a story of Western art growing from crude and inaccurate depictions to paintings that were almost like photographs. It is a story of progress and advancement.

Orthodoxy can see something else in the story. Western art became photorealistic, not because they progressed from something inferior, but because their understanding of symbol had disintegrated.

If a picture is real to you as a symbol, then you don't have to strive too hard to "accomplish" the picture, in the same sense that someone who has never gotten in trouble with alcohol doesn't have to make an unprovoked lecture on why he doesn't have a drinking problem. People who use alcohol responsibly rarely feel the need to prove that they don't have a drinking problem; it's someone who has a drinking problem who feels the need to make sure you know that his drinking is under control. People who don't have a problem don't feel the need to defend themselves, and artists and publics who haven't lost symbols don't feel a need to cram in photorealism. When Renaissance artists inaccurately portrayed the place of Christ's birth as having a grid of rectangular tiles, they were cramming in photorealism. It wasn't even that they thought they needed photorealism to make a legitimate picture. They went beyond that need to make the picture an opportunity to demonstrate photorealism, whether or not the photorealism really belonged there. From an Orthodox perspective the problem is not the historical inaccuracy of saying that Christ was born in a room with a tiled floor instead of a cave. The anachronism isn't that big of a deal. From an Orthodox perspective the problem is that, instead of making a symbol the way people do when they really believe in symbol, people were making pictures the way people do when the pictures are unreal to them as symbols. The artists went for broke and pushed the envelope on photorealism because the West had lost something much more important than photorealism.

Good Orthodox icons don't even pretend to be photorealistic, but this is not simply because Orthodox iconography has failed to learn from Western perspective. As it turns out, Orthodox icons use a reverse perspective that is designed to include the viewer in the picture. Someone who has become a part of the tradition is drawn into the picture, and in that sense an icon is like a door, even if it's more common to call icons "windows of Heaven." But it's not helpful to simply say "Icons don't use Renaissance perspective, but reverse perspective that includes the viewer," because even if the reverse perspective is there, reverse perspective is simply not the point. There are some iconographers who are excellent artists, and artistry does matter, but the point of an icon is to have something more than artistry, as much as the point of visiting a friend is more than seeing the scenery along the way, even if the scenery is quite beautiful and adds to the pleasure of a visit. Cramming in photorealism is a way of making more involved excursions and dredging up more exotic or historic or whatever destinations that go well beyond a scenic route, after you have lost the ability to visit a friend. The Western claim is "Look at how much more extravagant and novel my trip are than driving along the same roads to see a friend!"—and the Orthodox response shows a different set of priorities: "Look how lonely you are now that you no longer visit friends!"

Taken from: http://jonathanscorner.com/orthodoxy/orthodoxy2.html

Quote
I also honestly don't "get" #28 about Kneeling/Prostrating -- that doesn't seem to be a very serious obstacle to reunion.  Every culture that Christianity has come across had different ways of worshipping God.  I think we should allow the Latin Catholics to keep some of their cultural heritage as long as it does not compromise the faith. 

The canon that forbade kneeling on Sundays was written precisely to establish a common standard. Yes, kneeling does occur in some Orthodox Churches, which does contradict the canon, but it is still a canon. Of course, canons are not legalistic rules but rather flexible guidelines, but still, the spirit of canon was intended for no one to kneel on Sundays, as opposed to everyone following a local tradition.
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2011, 01:31:41 PM »

I think numbers #1 through 4 represent the main stumbling blocks.  If we were to ever work past those, then all of the other things which you mentioned would naturally be done away much quicker for a unity with the Orthodox.  Although I don't see how #12, or #5 make any difference whatsoever -- in regards to the Filioque as long as we understand that it does not carry the same meaning in Greek, as it does in Latin.  The Papal claims are more of an issue than the Filioque is..

The problem is, we can't even say the Spirit proceeds "through" the Son as through the Father. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent by the Son. So in any aspect, the Filioque cannot even be a theologoumena. I forgot which podcast it was, but there was a podcast that explained this extremely well, it might have been Fr. Thomas Hopko...

Perhaps you didn't word what you wanted to say accurately? No one ever said anything about proceeding through the Father.  Also, Father Thomas Hopko is just a priest -- and these things haven't been officially decided yet.  There are other Orthodox who do not feel it is such an issue, (i.e. Metropolitan Kallistos Ware).  It was created to deal with the Arians in Spain, and it worked -- now we can all move on to better things.. because the Greeks, Russians, and Antiochians will never have to say the Filioque in the Nicene Creed.  There would be no "Pope" to enforce such a thing.. because that would've disappeared by reunion.  

And the West should never ever say it in their Creed. They can't continue saying it if reunion is to happen. Like I've pointed out, it's been declared anathema and denounced by multiple Orthodox Saints and Councils. (not to mention several Popes prior to the schism)
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 #12 on: August 17, 2011, 01:37:11 PM »

Yes I am, and it should not happen. Just because some Orthodox do does it make it okay? No, certainly not. Its a disgusting, heretical practice.

Can you please cite where this has been condemned by:

a) Councils
b) the Church Fathers
c) Saints

Quote
Not all of these are deal breakers, but are things that they will have to do to become Orthodox again.

Those who sit during services are not Orthodox??
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #13 on: August 17, 2011, 01:37:36 PM »

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)

Traditional forms according to whom? This is silly.

Traditional forms according to Orthodoxy. Thankfully the westernized icons are disappearing in Greece, and hopefully that will continue in Russia as well.
Is this "traditional" or not?


Quote
And that makes it right? Like it says... Mandatory. There is nothing wrong with clerical celibacy as long as a Priest is permitted to be married and not required to be celibate.

The Church condemns separating clergy from their wives. In the Western practice that developed clergy were not married to begin with. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as it's recognized as just a local tradition.

Quote
Not really either, there are Orthodox Saints and Councils condemning [unleavened hosts].

And there are (Western) Orthodox saints who used unleavened bread in the eucharist.

Quote
[Self-flagellation] a disgusting, heretical practice.

Why?

Quote
Not all of these are deal breakers, but are things that they will have to do to become Orthodox again.

So the GOAA is no longer Orthodox. Got it.
Quote
Your point? I've actually seen Roman Catholics defending both the Crusades and the Inquisitions.

I've seen Orthodox defending Justinian's persecutions. Does that place them outside the Church in your view?

Quote
Quote
21.   Legalistic theology
You should know what I'm talking about here.

Oh, I've heard all the buzzwords and sloganeering, but I've yet to see a demonstration of anything concrete.

Quote
Not necessarily talking about the use of the words, but rather how they are understood in each church.

What's the difference then?

Quote
Really? Tell me where we officially believe that Mary was assumed into heaven prior to her death?

Tell me where the Catholic Church dogmatically teaches this.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Andrew Crook
formerly known as AveChriste11
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 523



« Reply #14 on: August 17, 2011, 01:40:09 PM »

Dude this reminds me of something I read one time,

"Rome is right.. because.. uh... it says so!"  Cheesy laugh
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 01:41:14 PM by AveChriste11 » Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity
Andrew Crook
formerly known as AveChriste11
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 523



« Reply #15 on: August 17, 2011, 01:42:41 PM »

The only time we kneel here at my parish, is when we say the prayer before communion.. with all of the "Amen's" and "I will not give you a kiss as did Judas.."  -- I can't remember the whole thing, it's very long.  We are part of the GOAA, therefore under Archbishop Demetrios.
Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #16 on: August 17, 2011, 01:44:14 PM »

The only time we kneel here at my parish, is when we say the prayer before communion.. with all of the "Amen's" and "I will not give you a kiss as did Judas.."  -- I can't remember the whole thing, it's very long.  We are part of the GOAA, therefore under Archbishop Demetrios.

According to the canons, we shouldn't do this on Sundays. But I wouldn't say the GOAA is no longer Orthodox because of it.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,478


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #17 on: August 17, 2011, 01:46:33 PM »

Concerning the Assumption of Mary - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02006b.htm

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #18 on: August 17, 2011, 02:01:15 PM »

So its permissible just because some in the GOAA do it? Do you forget how westernized some parts of the GOAA and the Church of Greece are? We need to purge ourselves of these disgusting western influences.

No kneeling on Sundays... No realistic/westernized icons... No self-flagellation...

Oh and as for self-flaggelation, tell me then why we condemn castration?

Isn't St. John Chrysostom's extreme fasting condemned because he caused harm to his own body?

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas. It is an absolute shame that the churches in Greece and Russia have been so influenced by them. In Greece it was because they sold themselves to the disgusting Venetians (and others) to try to save themselves from the Turks, and in Russia it is because of devils like Czar Peter I who loved the west more than his own nation and faith.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #19 on: August 17, 2011, 02:02:14 PM »

Post your Theses on the Pope's facebook wall or whatever the kids call it.

Logged

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

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #20 on: August 17, 2011, 02:05:47 PM »

So its permissible just because some in the GOAA do it? Do you forget how westernized some parts of the GOAA and the Church of Greece are? We need to purge ourselves of these disgusting western influences.

No kneeling on Sundays... No realistic/westernized icons... No self-flagellation...

Oh and as for self-flaggelation, tell me then why we condemn castration?

Isn't St. John Chrysostom's extreme fasting condemned because he caused harm to his own body?

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas. It is an absolute shame that the churches in Greece and Russia have been so influenced by them. In Greece it was because they sold themselves to the disgusting Venetians (and others) to try to save themselves from the Turks, and in Russia it is because of devils like Czar Peter I who loved the west more than his own nation and faith.

Guess you better post them on the facebook wall of every Orthodox Bishop as well.

Where were you born? Do you have any idea what you mean by "Western"?

You do realize that very medium you are using is the product of the vile "Western" world?

You triumphalism has risen to incredible heights.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #21 on: August 17, 2011, 02:11:08 PM »

So its permissible just because some in the GOAA do it? Do you forget how westernized some parts of the GOAA and the Church of Greece are? We need to purge ourselves of these disgusting western influences.

No kneeling on Sundays... No realistic/westernized icons... No self-flagellation...

Oh and as for self-flaggelation, tell me then why we condemn castration?

Isn't St. John Chrysostom's extreme fasting condemned because he caused harm to his own body?

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas. It is an absolute shame that the churches in Greece and Russia have been so influenced by them. In Greece it was because they sold themselves to the disgusting Venetians (and others) to try to save themselves from the Turks, and in Russia it is because of devils like Czar Peter I who loved the west more than his own nation and faith.

Guess you better post them on the facebook wall of every Orthodox Bishop as well.

Where were you born? Do you have any idea what you mean by "Western"?

You do realize that very medium you are using is the product of the vile "Western" world?

You triumphalism has risen to incredible heights.



Like I said...

Kneeling on Sundays...
Pews...
Realistic/Westernized Icons...
Self-Flagellation...
Some modern teachings regarding Bishops that have arisen... (can't really remember atm specifically)
etc...

Are all things that need to be removed from the Orthodox Church.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #22 on: August 17, 2011, 02:18:56 PM »

So its permissible just because some in the GOAA do it? Do you forget how westernized some parts of the GOAA and the Church of Greece are? We need to purge ourselves of these disgusting western influences.

No kneeling on Sundays... No realistic/westernized icons... No self-flagellation...

Oh and as for self-flaggelation, tell me then why we condemn castration?

Isn't St. John Chrysostom's extreme fasting condemned because he caused harm to his own body?

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas. It is an absolute shame that the churches in Greece and Russia have been so influenced by them. In Greece it was because they sold themselves to the disgusting Venetians (and others) to try to save themselves from the Turks, and in Russia it is because of devils like Czar Peter I who loved the west more than his own nation and faith.

Guess you better post them on the facebook wall of every Orthodox Bishop as well.

Where were you born? Do you have any idea what you mean by "Western"?

You do realize that very medium you are using is the product of the vile "Western" world?

You triumphalism has risen to incredible heights.



Like I said...

Kneeling on Sundays...
Pews...
Realistic/Westernized Icons...
Self-Flagellation...
Some modern teachings regarding Bishops that have arisen... (can't really remember atm specifically)
etc...

Are all things that need to be removed from the Orthodox Church.

What about Western Reformers? Do they need to go as well?

If so . . .
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
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 #23 on: August 17, 2011, 02:29:57 PM »

Oh and as for self-flaggelation, tell me then why we condemn castration?

Those who castrate themselves are to be barred from the priesthood--those who have had castration forced upon them are not. In any case, it doesn't follow that if self-castration is to be condemned that self-flagellation is as well. It will depend on what definition you are using. It seems that you are condemning such activities across the board. Where does that leave St Seraphim of Sarov, who wore a heavy chain and knelt on a rock for 1000 nights?? Is that not self-mortification?? What about Eldress Maria, who gave a prophecy to the Tsarina in 1916 regarding the future martyrdom of the Imperial Family. "...she visited Eldress Maria Mikhailovna in her tiny cell, where the aged woman had lain for many years in heavy chains on an iron bed."

Quote
Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas.

Death to the Internets!
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,360



« Reply #24 on: August 17, 2011, 02:33:39 PM »

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas.
Sigh. Disgusting?



I guess this just turns your stomach.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 02:36:54 PM by Agabus » Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #25 on: August 17, 2011, 02:36:38 PM »

Death to the Internets!

This I can get behind. Do you want to get together and discussing rolling out a website detailing our rationales and sell kids all sortsa chotchkies to they can proclaim their counter-cultural stance?

I am already working getting that locked down as a URL for every known blogging service, email provider, twitter account etc.

 
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,360



« Reply #26 on: August 17, 2011, 02:39:25 PM »

Death to the Internets!

This I can get behind. Do you want to get together and discussing rolling out a website detailing our rationales and sell kids all sortsa chotchkies to they can proclaim their counter-cultural stance?
This one?
Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,867



« Reply #27 on: August 17, 2011, 02:46:09 PM »

Devin--When you lump everything together, as if they are all of equal importance, you are not going to get much agreement except from those who are opposed to reunion no matter what. Indeed, you run the danger of having looked far and wide to find the very last nail for the reunion coffin. Why not agree that some of the conditions re more critical than the others?
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,853



« Reply #28 on: August 17, 2011, 02:49:20 PM »

And there are (Western) Orthodox saints who used unleavened bread in the eucharist.

Care to point out some?

15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy

A pre-schism Latin tradition.
Condemned before the schism.

Agreed but still it's not a barrier for communion.

I think that terms for communion should be set to absolute minimum. Thus while I agree that pews, instruments, realistic art etc. are bad traditions I don't believe that they should hinder the restoration of communion.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 03:03:53 PM by Alpo » Logged

orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #29 on: August 17, 2011, 02:58:19 PM »

Death to the Internets!

This I can get behind. Do you want to get together and discussing rolling out a website detailing our rationales and sell kids all sortsa chotchkies to they can proclaim their counter-cultural stance?
This one?

But updated to appeal to the virtual worlders who want to show their disgust at the virtual world  while living in it and via it.

Identity through consumption and branding.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,360



« Reply #30 on: August 17, 2011, 03:04:20 PM »

Death to the Internets!

This I can get behind. Do you want to get together and discussing rolling out a website detailing our rationales and sell kids all sortsa chotchkies to they can proclaim their counter-cultural stance?
This one?

But updated to appeal to the virtual worlders who want to show their disgust at the virtual world  while living in it and via it.

Identity through consumption and branding.
So like this one, but virtual and badass?
Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #31 on: August 17, 2011, 03:13:08 PM »

Death to the Internets!

This I can get behind. Do you want to get together and discussing rolling out a website detailing our rationales and sell kids all sortsa chotchkies to they can proclaim their counter-cultural stance?
This one?

But updated to appeal to the virtual worlders who want to show their disgust at the virtual world  while living in it and via it.

Identity through consumption and branding.
So like this one, but virtual and badass?

Shrewd, my friend. Shrewd . . .
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #32 on: August 17, 2011, 03:14:11 PM »


Quote
Quote
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh

You'll be disappointed to learn that this happens in Orthodox monasteries too.
Yes I am, and it should not happen. Just because some Orthodox do does it make it okay? No, certainly not. Its a disgusting, heretical practice.

I guess we should just "de-canonize" all those stylites because sitting out in the elements for decades is a far more worse and disgusting physical practice than self whipping.

BTW, aren't those words too big?  Maybe you should write, "Hitting/Cutting Yourself".  That way more people will understand you.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: August 17, 2011, 03:15:17 PM »

So its permissible just because some in the GOAA do it? Do you forget how westernized some parts of the GOAA and the Church of Greece are? We need to purge ourselves of these disgusting western influences.

No kneeling on Sundays... No realistic/westernized icons... No self-flagellation...

Oh and as for self-flaggelation, tell me then why we condemn castration?

Isn't St. John Chrysostom's extreme fasting condemned because he caused harm to his own body?

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas. It is an absolute shame that the churches in Greece and Russia have been so influenced by them. In Greece it was because they sold themselves to the disgusting Venetians (and others) to try to save themselves from the Turks, and in Russia it is because of devils like Czar Peter I who loved the west more than his own nation and faith.

Guess you better post them on the facebook wall of every Orthodox Bishop as well.

Where were you born? Do you have any idea what you mean by "Western"?

You do realize that very medium you are using is the product of the vile "Western" world?

You triumphalism has risen to incredible heights.



Stop using those big words.  He might have to look them up and he'll get cross about it.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,867



« Reply #34 on: August 17, 2011, 03:16:29 PM »

The only time we kneel here at my parish, is when we say the prayer before communion.. with all of the "Amen's" and "I will not give you a kiss as did Judas.."  -- I can't remember the whole thing, it's very long.  We are part of the GOAA, therefore under Archbishop Demetrios.

Ave AveChriste! In my OCA parish, except for those who must sit down, we stand most of the time. Most folks sit down (on the floor or the pews against the sides of the church) only for the reading of the Epistle and during the sermon, even though it is permissible to sit during the antiphons.

Regarding kneeling, we kneel only during the kneeling prayers after Pentecost, which are done right after DL to catch the largest possible number of participants. At other times, after making the sign of the cross, we either bow down from the waist, touching the floor with our right hand, or we prostrate ourselves (but never on Sunday). The closest we get to kneeling is when some of us kind of flex our knees so that the priest does not have to strain to put Communion in our mouths.

We say the following short prayers before communion:

I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. Moreover, I believe that this is truly thine immaculate Body and that this is truly thy most precious Blood. Therefore, I pray Thee, have mercy upon me, and forgive my transgressions, both voluntary and involuntary, in word or in deed, in knowledge or in ignorance. And grant that I may partake of thy Holy Mysteries without condemnation, for the remission of sins and for life everlasting.

Of thy Mystical Supper, O Son of God, today admit me a partaker, for I will not tell of thy Mysteries unto thine enemies, neither will I give Thee a kiss as did Judas, but like the thief do I confess Thee: remember me, O Lord, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Master, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Holy One, when Thou comest into thy kingdom. Not for judgment nor for condemnation be the partaking of thy Holy Mysteries unto me, O Lord, but for healing of soul and body.

Of course, words are not adequate to describe our more of worship, which is slightly different than some other jurisdictions an d it may be a good thing if you could come and see one day.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 03:18:47 PM by Second Chance » Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #35 on: August 17, 2011, 03:17:31 PM »

With reference to 10.   Purgatory and Indulgences:
From my understanding of it, if you eliminate Purgatory, you would have only heaven or hell. Who then goes to heaven, and who goes to hell? For example, if you are guilty of a lessor sin, would you then go to heaven anyway, regardless of whether or not you had repented of it? Suppose that you had picked a flower in a park, where the sign reads: Do not pick the flowers. Then you are guilty of the sin of stealing. Would you then go to hell and be subject to eternal and everlasting damnation and fire? It seems to me that there would be some lessor sins, that would call for a lessor punishment, a temporal state of cleansing, which is known as Purgatory by Catholics.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 03:29:01 PM by stanley123 » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #36 on: August 17, 2011, 03:21:01 PM »

With reference to 18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass:
I would suggest that you first implement this regulation in the Orthodox Church before attempting to impose it upon the Catholics. I knew a case where a priest's wife had written to the bishop complaining of her husband's infidelity, and yet nothing was done, even after the divorce and remarriage.
Logged
lost
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296


« Reply #37 on: August 17, 2011, 03:21:46 PM »

many of this "distinctions" existed way back before the 1054, but no one had anything against them... it was a sore of unity in diversion... the latins have a different culture than the easterns, and orientals , and so on...
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #38 on: August 17, 2011, 03:22:48 PM »

The only time we kneel here at my parish, is when we say the prayer before communion.. with all of the "Amen's" and "I will not give you a kiss as did Judas.."  -- I can't remember the whole thing, it's very long.  We are part of the GOAA, therefore under Archbishop Demetrios.

Ave AveChriste! In my OCA parish, except for those who must sit down, we stand most of the time. Most folks sit down (on the floor or the pews against the sides of the church) only for the reading of the Epistle and during the sermon, even though it is permissible to sit during the antiphons.

Regarding kneeling, we kneel only during the kneeling prayers after Pentecost, which are done right after DL to catch the largest possible number of participants. At other times, after making the sign of the cross, we either bow down from the waist, touching the floor with our right hand, or we prostrate ourselves (but never on Sunday). The closest we get to kneeling is when some of us kind of flex our knees so that the priest does not have to strain to put Communion in our mouths.

We say two two following short prayers before communion:

I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. Moreover, I believe that this is truly thine immaculate Body and that this is truly thy most precious Blood. Therefore, I pray Thee, have mercy upon me, and forgive my transgressions, both voluntary and involuntary, in word or in deed, in knowledge or in ignorance. And grant that I may partake of thy Holy Mysteries without condemnation, for the remission of sins and for life everlasting.

Of thy Mystical Supper, O Son of God, today admit me a partaker, for I will not tell of thy Mysteries unto thine enemies, neither will I give Thee a kiss as did Judas, but like the thief do I confess Thee: remember me, O Lord, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Master, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Holy One, when Thou comest into thy kingdom. Not for judgment nor for condemnation be the partaking of thy Holy Mysteries unto me, O Lord, but for healing of soul and body.

Of course, words are not adequate to describe our more of worship, which is slightly different than some other jurisdictions an d it may be a good thing if you could come and see one day.


During a DL celebrated outside a Sunday we kneel during the Our Father during the Liturgy of gifts.

OCA Parish.

And by "we" I mean our Priest and some of us, too many pews for everyone to do it if packed. The kneeling is coupled with a bow of sorts.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 03:23:21 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,867



« Reply #39 on: August 17, 2011, 03:23:35 PM »

With reference to 10.   Purgatory and Indulgences:
From my understanding of it, if you eliminate Purgatory, you would have only heaven or hell. Who then goes to heaven, and who goes to hell? For example, if you are guilty of a lessor sin, would you then go to heaven anyway, regardless of whether or not you had repented of it? Suppose that you had picked a flower in a park, where the sign reads: Do not pick the flowers. Then you are guilty of the sin of stealing. Would you then go to hell and be subject to eternal and everlasting damnation and fire? It weems to me that there would be some lessor sins, that would call for a lessor punishment, a temporal state of cleansing, which is known as Purgatory by Catholics.

And we have Orthodox folks, to include some Saints, who believe in aerial toll houses that accomplish much the same thing. The problem is that in any reunion that may happen any such Roman dogma cannot be catholic, that is,obligatory for the whole Catholic Church.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #40 on: August 17, 2011, 03:24:17 PM »

With reference to 25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries):
I don't quite understand the big difference between the two.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #41 on: August 17, 2011, 03:26:04 PM »

With reference to 25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries):
I don't quite understand the big difference between the two.


I'm sure Devin with enlighten you with his newly acquired Orthodox phronema.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #42 on: August 17, 2011, 03:27:13 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an option, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 03:27:40 PM by stanley123 » Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #43 on: August 17, 2011, 03:30:02 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #44 on: August 17, 2011, 03:30:47 PM »

With reference to 25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries):
I don't quite understand the big difference between the two.


I'm sure Devin with enlighten you with his newly acquired Orthodox phronema.

And in "Dick and Jane" English so you won't get confused!
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #45 on: August 17, 2011, 03:40:31 PM »

many of this "distinctions" existed way back before the 1054, but no one had anything against them... it was a sore of unity in diversion... the latins have a different culture than the easterns, and orientals , and so on...

The problem is... Those all contributed to the schism. No one is asking for absolute conformity to the Byzantine Rite. What I'm arguing, is that certain "diversions" are inappropriate and shouldn't be allowed period. That doesn't mean there can be some differences in rites.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #46 on: August 17, 2011, 03:42:07 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #47 on: August 17, 2011, 03:44:29 PM »

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas.
Sigh. Disgusting?



I guess this just turns your stomach.

That should never ever be allowed. If there are existing icons that have been blessed and are in a westernized fashion, then once they wear down and fade from use, if restored, then they need to be repainted in a traditional manner. And iconographers should not be allowed to paint anymore icons in that westernized/realistic fashion. That is a corruption from the Western Churches that came about due to the Venetians, Italians, and other Westerners on places like Greece and Russia. It is unfitting for holy icons to be painted in such a manner, and as I said, no more should be allowed, and those existing are permissible, and preferably, if restored, should be repainted in a traditional fashion.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #48 on: August 17, 2011, 03:45:34 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,867



« Reply #49 on: August 17, 2011, 03:46:59 PM »

The only time we kneel here at my parish, is when we say the prayer before communion.. with all of the "Amen's" and "I will not give you a kiss as did Judas.."  -- I can't remember the whole thing, it's very long.  We are part of the GOAA, therefore under Archbishop Demetrios.

Ave AveChriste! In my OCA parish, except for those who must sit down, we stand most of the time. Most folks sit down (on the floor or the pews against the sides of the church) only for the reading of the Epistle and during the sermon, even though it is permissible to sit during the antiphons.

Regarding kneeling, we kneel only during the kneeling prayers after Pentecost, which are done right after DL to catch the largest possible number of participants. At other times, after making the sign of the cross, we either bow down from the waist, touching the floor with our right hand, or we prostrate ourselves (but never on Sunday). The closest we get to kneeling is when some of us kind of flex our knees so that the priest does not have to strain to put Communion in our mouths.

We say two two following short prayers before communion:

I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. Moreover, I believe that this is truly thine immaculate Body and that this is truly thy most precious Blood. Therefore, I pray Thee, have mercy upon me, and forgive my transgressions, both voluntary and involuntary, in word or in deed, in knowledge or in ignorance. And grant that I may partake of thy Holy Mysteries without condemnation, for the remission of sins and for life everlasting.

Of thy Mystical Supper, O Son of God, today admit me a partaker, for I will not tell of thy Mysteries unto thine enemies, neither will I give Thee a kiss as did Judas, but like the thief do I confess Thee: remember me, O Lord, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Master, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Holy One, when Thou comest into thy kingdom. Not for judgment nor for condemnation be the partaking of thy Holy Mysteries unto me, O Lord, but for healing of soul and body.

Of course, words are not adequate to describe our more of worship, which is slightly different than some other jurisdictions an d it may be a good thing if you could come and see one day.


During a DL celebrated outside a Sunday we kneel during the Our Father during the Liturgy of gifts.

OCA Parish.

And by "we" I mean our Priest and some of us, too many pews for everyone to do it if packed. The kneeling is coupled with a bow of sorts.

Right. In my old church (Bulgarian Diocese--OCA), we used to kneel not only during Our Father but also during We Hymn Thee and the pre-communion prayers. I think they were left over ethnic practices, as Augustin says, the way we used to do them in the Old Country. The problem is that this is against an ancient Canon and seems to have developed to make up for the congregation's lack of rigor. In a way, this is similar to requiring a long and rigorous preparation before confession/communion in local churches that had fallen into the habit of four confessions/communions per year for the laity. So, in my Bulgarian parish of the OCA we practiced a variation of the same impulse to make things more rigorous even at the last moment to stress the holiness and importance of what we are experiencing.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #50 on: August 17, 2011, 03:48:39 PM »

The only time we kneel here at my parish, is when we say the prayer before communion.. with all of the "Amen's" and "I will not give you a kiss as did Judas.."  -- I can't remember the whole thing, it's very long.  We are part of the GOAA, therefore under Archbishop Demetrios.

Ave AveChriste! In my OCA parish, except for those who must sit down, we stand most of the time. Most folks sit down (on the floor or the pews against the sides of the church) only for the reading of the Epistle and during the sermon, even though it is permissible to sit during the antiphons.

Regarding kneeling, we kneel only during the kneeling prayers after Pentecost, which are done right after DL to catch the largest possible number of participants. At other times, after making the sign of the cross, we either bow down from the waist, touching the floor with our right hand, or we prostrate ourselves (but never on Sunday). The closest we get to kneeling is when some of us kind of flex our knees so that the priest does not have to strain to put Communion in our mouths.

We say two two following short prayers before communion:

I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. Moreover, I believe that this is truly thine immaculate Body and that this is truly thy most precious Blood. Therefore, I pray Thee, have mercy upon me, and forgive my transgressions, both voluntary and involuntary, in word or in deed, in knowledge or in ignorance. And grant that I may partake of thy Holy Mysteries without condemnation, for the remission of sins and for life everlasting.

Of thy Mystical Supper, O Son of God, today admit me a partaker, for I will not tell of thy Mysteries unto thine enemies, neither will I give Thee a kiss as did Judas, but like the thief do I confess Thee: remember me, O Lord, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Master, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Holy One, when Thou comest into thy kingdom. Not for judgment nor for condemnation be the partaking of thy Holy Mysteries unto me, O Lord, but for healing of soul and body.

Of course, words are not adequate to describe our more of worship, which is slightly different than some other jurisdictions an d it may be a good thing if you could come and see one day.


During a DL celebrated outside a Sunday we kneel during the Our Father during the Liturgy of gifts.

OCA Parish.

And by "we" I mean our Priest and some of us, too many pews for everyone to do it if packed. The kneeling is coupled with a bow of sorts.

Right. In my old church (Bulgarian Diocese--OCA), we used to kneel not only during Our Father but also during We Hymn Thee and the pre-communion prayers. I think they were left over ethnic practices, as Augustin says, the way we used to do them in the Old Country. The problem is that this is against an ancient Canon and seems to have developed to make up for the congregation's lack of rigor. In a way, this is similar to requiring a long and rigorous preparation before confession/communion in local churches that had fallen into the habit of four confessions/communions per year for the laity. So, in my Bulgarian parish of the OCA we practiced a variation of the same impulse to make things more rigorous even at the last moment to stress the holiness and importance of what we are experiencing.

Isn't the problem kneeling on Sunday and not necessarily kneeling during Liturgy?
(I would argue there is a big difference between kneeling/prostrating and sitting... two are acts of humility, the other is an act of relaxation - which will we do before the throne of God, which we are standing before during the Liturgy?)
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #51 on: August 17, 2011, 03:48:49 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...
So, if a person has a severe allergy to alcohol, you would not allow him to take the Bread (Body of Christ) alone?
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #52 on: August 17, 2011, 03:48:55 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.

What does have to do with alcoholism? You are a moving target now.

Yes, if you have an alcohol allergy (I am quickly going through my computer banks in my head to think of how this could be remotely possible and if so its likelihood. I don't need google) that will kill you, don't drink alcohol.

And an ounce is a fair amount of alcohol, you are not even going to get close to that, not by a mile by being Communed.

This is I do know, because I can do basic math.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #53 on: August 17, 2011, 03:49:52 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...
So, if a person has a severe allergy to alcohol, you would not allow him to take the Bread (Body of Christ) alone?

It is the Body & Blood of Christ. It might taste like alcohol and bread, but its not. It is literally his body and his blood. Do you deny this?
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,867



« Reply #54 on: August 17, 2011, 03:51:09 PM »

Like I said, we need to absolutely purge ourselves of these various disgusting western innovations and ideas.
Sigh. Disgusting?



I guess this just turns your stomach.

That should never ever be allowed. If there are existing icons that have been blessed and are in a westernized fashion, then once they wear down and fade from use, if restored, then they need to be repainted in a traditional manner. And iconographers should not be allowed to paint anymore icons in that westernized/realistic fashion. That is a corruption from the Western Churches that came about due to the Venetians, Italians, and other Westerners on places like Greece and Russia. It is unfitting for holy icons to be painted in such a manner, and as I said, no more should be allowed, and those existing are permissible, and preferably, if restored, should be repainted in a traditional fashion.

I would agree with you if you had not made such a sweeping and categorical statement. I too would prefer traditional icons. I too agree that many icons in many Orthodox Churches show Western influences. However, it is too much when you start demanding rather than recommending.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #55 on: August 17, 2011, 03:52:11 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

The flu certainly could be. Extremely, extremely unlikely though. If you think otherwise, you are outta your mind.

If you think the Eucharist magically alter the physical world (that's not even close to Orthodoxy), then next you take Communion let me dump whatever amount of poison I want, and you take it.

You are getting into snake handling territory.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #56 on: August 17, 2011, 03:55:37 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

The flu certainly could be. Extremely, extremely unlikely though. If you think otherwise, you are outta your mind.

If you think the Eucharist magically alter the physical world (that's not even close to Orthodoxy), then next you take Communion let me dump whatever amount of poison I want, and you take it.

You are getting into snake handling territory.

Need I mention the Priest who gave communion to someone with rabies, who then regurgitated it, and the Saint immediately consumed it and wasn't harmed?

No, it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for the Eucharist to transmit any illness.

(BTW, hasn't that occurred in history, persecutors lacing communion with poison, and it doing nothing?)

I don't know if you know this or not, but if you add anything, water, more wine, etc... to the chalice after its been consecrated, what you added immediately becomes the body & blood of Christ. Yes, it does alter things, it is completely changed.

Even Holy Water can be this way... At our parish, if we encounter a cup of holy water that hasn't been consumed, we either consume it ourselves or pour it on a plant (that is, under it), we don't worry so much about disease transmission, because it is Holy Water. If Holy Water is like this, how much more so is the Eucharist pure and unable to transmit disease!
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 03:57:59 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #57 on: August 17, 2011, 03:56:39 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...
So, if a person has a severe allergy to alcohol, you would not allow him to take the Bread (Body of Christ) alone?

It is the Body & Blood of Christ. It might taste like alcohol and bread, but its not. It is literally his body and his blood. Do you deny this?
It is the Body and Blood of Christ. However, what would happen if a chemist were to conduct an examination  under a microscope. He would see the chemical appearances of bread and wine.The chemist would not see the biological and chemical characteristics of  human flesh and human blood.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #58 on: August 17, 2011, 03:58:35 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...
So, if a person has a severe allergy to alcohol, you would not allow him to take the Bread (Body of Christ) alone?

It is the Body & Blood of Christ. It might taste like alcohol and bread, but its not. It is literally his body and his blood. Do you deny this?
It is the Body and Blood of Christ. However, what would happen if a chemist were to conduct an examination  under a microscope. He would see the chemical appearances of bread and wine.The chemist would not see the biological and chemical characteristics of  human flesh and human blood.


Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #59 on: August 17, 2011, 04:00:06 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

The flu certainly could be. Extremely, extremely unlikely though. If you think otherwise, you are outta your mind.

If you think the Eucharist magically alter the physical world (that's not even close to Orthodoxy), then next you take Communion let me dump whatever amount of poison I want, and you take it.

You are getting into snake handling territory.

Need I mention the Priest who gave communion to someone with rabies, who then regurgitated it, and the Saint immediately consumed it and wasn't harmed?

No, it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for the Eucharist to transmit any illness.

(BTW, hasn't that occurred in history, persecutors lacing communion with poison, and it doing nothing?)

I don't know if you know this or not, but if you add anything, water, more wine, etc... to the chalice after its been consecrated, what you added immediately becomes the body & blood of Christ. Yes, it does alter things, it is completely changed.

Even Holy Water can be this way... At our parish, if we encounter a cup of holy water that hasn't been consumed, we either consume it ourselves or pour it on a plant (that is, under it), we don't worry so much about disease transmission, because it is Holy Water. If Holy Water is like this, how much more so is the Eucharist pure and unable to transmit disease!

And some Saints have bi-located. So what?

Wanna try? I am sure there is a Priest in the Old World that augustin can set us up with who would like to pull this one on you.

« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:01:51 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #60 on: August 17, 2011, 04:01:43 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

The flu certainly could be. Extremely, extremely unlikely though. If you think otherwise, you are outta your mind.

If you think the Eucharist magically alter the physical world (that's not even close to Orthodoxy), then next you take Communion let me dump whatever amount of poison I want, and you take it.

You are getting into snake handling territory.

Need I mention the Priest who gave communion to someone with rabies, who then regurgitated it, and the Saint immediately consumed it and wasn't harmed?

No, it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for the Eucharist to transmit any illness.

(BTW, hasn't that occurred in history, persecutors lacing communion with poison, and it doing nothing?)

I don't know if you know this or not, but if you add anything, water, more wine, etc... to the chalice after its been consecrated, what you added immediately becomes the body & blood of Christ. Yes, it does alter things, it is completely changed.

Even Holy Water can be this way... At our parish, if we encounter a cup of holy water that hasn't been consumed, we either consume it ourselves or pour it on a plant (that is, under it), we don't worry so much about disease transmission, because it is Holy Water. If Holy Water is like this, how much more so is the Eucharist pure and unable to transmit disease!

And some Saints have bi-located. So what?

Wanna try? I am sure there is a Priest in the Old World that augustin can set up with who would like to pull this one on you.



Why would I want to test God? You know, testing God almost never ends up in a good way for the person testing him.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #61 on: August 17, 2011, 04:02:15 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...
So, if a person has a severe allergy to alcohol, you would not allow him to take the Bread (Body of Christ) alone?

It is the Body & Blood of Christ. It might taste like alcohol and bread, but its not. It is literally his body and his blood. Do you deny this?
It is the Body and Blood of Christ. However, what would happen if a chemist were to conduct an examination  under a microscope. He would see the chemical appearances of bread and wine.The chemist would not see the biological and chemical characteristics of  human flesh and human blood.


Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.
It is my opinion on it. 
Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #62 on: August 17, 2011, 04:02:53 PM »

So once the Pope meets meets demands, whose gonna organize enough Orthodox priests to take over the Roman churches, install iconostasis and transfer everything to eastern rite, and then rebaptize all the faithful (including the clergy up to and including the Pope) as laymen after being properly catechized?

Sigh. Disgusting?



I guess this just turns your stomach.

That should never ever be allowed

My priest has yet to excommunicate me for wearing a medal of this around my neck.
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #63 on: August 17, 2011, 04:03:12 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

The flu certainly could be. Extremely, extremely unlikely though. If you think otherwise, you are outta your mind.

If you think the Eucharist magically alter the physical world (that's not even close to Orthodoxy), then next you take Communion let me dump whatever amount of poison I want, and you take it.

You are getting into snake handling territory.

Need I mention the Priest who gave communion to someone with rabies, who then regurgitated it, and the Saint immediately consumed it and wasn't harmed?

No, it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for the Eucharist to transmit any illness.

(BTW, hasn't that occurred in history, persecutors lacing communion with poison, and it doing nothing?)

I don't know if you know this or not, but if you add anything, water, more wine, etc... to the chalice after its been consecrated, what you added immediately becomes the body & blood of Christ. Yes, it does alter things, it is completely changed.

Even Holy Water can be this way... At our parish, if we encounter a cup of holy water that hasn't been consumed, we either consume it ourselves or pour it on a plant (that is, under it), we don't worry so much about disease transmission, because it is Holy Water. If Holy Water is like this, how much more so is the Eucharist pure and unable to transmit disease!

And some Saints have bi-located. So what?

Wanna try? I am sure there is a Priest in the Old World that augustin can set up with who would like to pull this one on you.



Why would I want to test God? You know, testing God almost never ends up in a good way for the person testing him.

Nice. So you agree with me. Thanks.

At least that is one move you have made here that ain't pure foolishness.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #64 on: August 17, 2011, 04:03:21 PM »

Double Post.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:03:59 PM by Melodist » Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #65 on: August 17, 2011, 04:03:38 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...
So, if a person has a severe allergy to alcohol, you would not allow him to take the Bread (Body of Christ) alone?

It is the Body & Blood of Christ. It might taste like alcohol and bread, but its not. It is literally his body and his blood. Do you deny this?
It is the Body and Blood of Christ. However, what would happen if a chemist were to conduct an examination  under a microscope. He would see the chemical appearances of bread and wine.The chemist would not see the biological and chemical characteristics of  human flesh and human blood.


Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.
It is my opinion on it. 

Which contradicts Orthodox tradition and praxis. I don't think even the Roman Catholic Church would share your opinion, but if it does, then I think that just proves my point.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #66 on: August 17, 2011, 04:05:35 PM »

So once the Pope meets meets demands, whose gonna organize enough Orthodox priests to take over the Roman churches, install iconostasis and transfer everything to eastern rite, and then rebaptize all the faithful (including the clergy up to and including the Pope) as laymen after being properly catechized?

Sigh. Disgusting?



I guess this just turns your stomach.

That should never ever be allowed

My priest has yet to excommunicate me for wearing a medal of this around my neck.

Given Devin his name so he can write your Bishop.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,179



WWW
« Reply #67 on: August 17, 2011, 04:05:54 PM »

I have made a list of terms some time ago.

Quote from: Fabio Leite on October 24, 2010, 05:00:07 PM
Quote
Union with the RC as it is now is no union, but just falling from the Tree of Life.

For a union to be true, I have already suggested a list of attitude and punctual changes elsewhere. Here it is again:

What I would expect from a *true* union would be:

From the Orthodox:


Apologize for and a more outspoken condemnation of phyletism;

Acknowledgemnt that the multi-culturalism of RC is the traditional way;

Acknowledgment that the role of the primate is more than just honorific;

Abandon the idea of infallibility of Councils; councils can and have stated heresies, they can and have been reproached by other elements of the Church;

Use the expression "through the Son" after "proceeds from the Father" instead of nothing;

Deal with excessive anti-rationalism;

Translate traditional liturgical rites and use them instead of foreign language rites;

(Just added)Organize itself in canonical terms around the world: one city - one bishop; Archdioceses, Metropolias, Eparchies and Patriarchates are not the institutional church per se, but the local diocese is. Supra-diocesical institutions such as Archdioceses, Metropolias, Eparchies and Patriarchates have an *assistive* role for communication and organization of the local churches. The concept is that "The National Association of Hospitals" is a necessary important institution, but it is not a hospital. Each hospital has its own head-doctor and administrator who is the bishop. The Patriarch or Metropolitan is a head doctor of his own hospital, and the "President" of the "National Association", not a kind of "top-head-doctor" that can interfere in every hospital. His authority over the other head-doctors is while members of the National Association, not as head-doctors of their own hospitals.

From the Roman church:

Apologize for and abandon the concept of infallibility of the Pope; popes can and have stated heresies, they can and have been reproached by other elements of the Church;

Abandon the monarchical model of primacy. Even if it was fit for Modern West (Medieval to Pre-WW I period) it was unfit for the East during the same period. The primate did not act as archpastor if he chose a model that was fit to just half the Church;

Use the expression "through the Son" instead of "and of the Son" after "proceeds from the Father";

Acknowledge that the Immaculate Conception is a theologumen and not a dogma;

Deal with excessive rationalism and emotionalism;

Translate traditional liturgical rites to local languages and use them instead of "modern" rites;

Allow married men to become priests;

Give the Most Pure Blood of Christ in Communion to lay people as well;

Statues are not a problem per se; yet, church imagery is not just decoration, they are tools of healing and should follow some rules. Church art cannot be over expressive, it should not immitate the body realistically, etc. etc. Church statues should be 3D icons. The artistic depictions of the West though can and should be preserved and developed, but as art, not as the tools of the hospital that is the church;

(just added)Abandon the excessive formulation of "Co-Mediatrix";



From both sides:
Reasses their lists of saints and devotions;
Become more active in the world;
Emphasys on ascetic life as the proper Christian life;
Stop condescending with worldly fashionable ideologies;
Stop condescending with criminal and/or immoral clergy;
Nor separation, nor union with the State: symphony when the State is not Anti-Christian, and outright vocal opposition when it is, if not from the people oppressed under such regimes, but from their brothers elsewhere;
Focus on Christ above all and on saints above celebrities;
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #68 on: August 17, 2011, 04:07:47 PM »

So once the Pope meets meets demands, whose gonna organize enough Orthodox priests to take over the Roman churches, install iconostasis and transfer everything to eastern rite, and then rebaptize all the faithful (including the clergy up to and including the Pope) as laymen after being properly catechized?

Sigh. Disgusting?



I guess this just turns your stomach.

That should never ever be allowed

My priest has yet to excommunicate me for wearing a medal of this around my neck.

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated. BTW, I also have a medal of this on a necklace, but its painted in a traditional fashion.

Look at this, you almost can't tell its an Orthodox Church (and the seat of the MP no less):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Cathedral_of_Christ_the_Saviour_in_Moscow_06.JPG

Compare that to how it should be done:
http://www.peterpaul.net/IMG_0843.JPG

Like I said, we shouldn't destroy the existing ones, but over time, we probably ought to just repaint them in traditional fashions, and completely ban our iconographers from doing it again.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:11:21 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #69 on: August 17, 2011, 04:09:29 PM »

With reference to 19.   Sitting during worship:
At our local Church there is a young lady who is crippled and attends Church sitting in a wheelchair. I would not agree with objecting to her sitting in her wheelchair during worship.
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,867



« Reply #70 on: August 17, 2011, 04:12:14 PM »

The only time we kneel here at my parish, is when we say the prayer before communion.. with all of the "Amen's" and "I will not give you a kiss as did Judas.."  -- I can't remember the whole thing, it's very long.  We are part of the GOAA, therefore under Archbishop Demetrios.

Ave AveChriste! In my OCA parish, except for those who must sit down, we stand most of the time. Most folks sit down (on the floor or the pews against the sides of the church) only for the reading of the Epistle and during the sermon, even though it is permissible to sit during the antiphons.

Regarding kneeling, we kneel only during the kneeling prayers after Pentecost, which are done right after DL to catch the largest possible number of participants. At other times, after making the sign of the cross, we either bow down from the waist, touching the floor with our right hand, or we prostrate ourselves (but never on Sunday). The closest we get to kneeling is when some of us kind of flex our knees so that the priest does not have to strain to put Communion in our mouths.

We say two two following short prayers before communion:

I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the first. Moreover, I believe that this is truly thine immaculate Body and that this is truly thy most precious Blood. Therefore, I pray Thee, have mercy upon me, and forgive my transgressions, both voluntary and involuntary, in word or in deed, in knowledge or in ignorance. And grant that I may partake of thy Holy Mysteries without condemnation, for the remission of sins and for life everlasting.

Of thy Mystical Supper, O Son of God, today admit me a partaker, for I will not tell of thy Mysteries unto thine enemies, neither will I give Thee a kiss as did Judas, but like the thief do I confess Thee: remember me, O Lord, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Master, in thy kingdom; remember me, O Holy One, when Thou comest into thy kingdom. Not for judgment nor for condemnation be the partaking of thy Holy Mysteries unto me, O Lord, but for healing of soul and body.

Of course, words are not adequate to describe our more of worship, which is slightly different than some other jurisdictions an d it may be a good thing if you could come and see one day.


During a DL celebrated outside a Sunday we kneel during the Our Father during the Liturgy of gifts.

OCA Parish.

And by "we" I mean our Priest and some of us, too many pews for everyone to do it if packed. The kneeling is coupled with a bow of sorts.

Right. In my old church (Bulgarian Diocese--OCA), we used to kneel not only during Our Father but also during We Hymn Thee and the pre-communion prayers. I think they were left over ethnic practices, as Augustin says, the way we used to do them in the Old Country. The problem is that this is against an ancient Canon and seems to have developed to make up for the congregation's lack of rigor. In a way, this is similar to requiring a long and rigorous preparation before confession/communion in local churches that had fallen into the habit of four confessions/communions per year for the laity. So, in my Bulgarian parish of the OCA we practiced a variation of the same impulse to make things more rigorous even at the last moment to stress the holiness and importance of what we are experiencing.

Isn't the problem kneeling on Sunday and not necessarily kneeling during Liturgy?
(I would argue there is a big difference between kneeling/prostrating and sitting... two are acts of humility, the other is an act of relaxation - which will we do before the throne of God, which we are standing before during the Liturgy?)

Well, no. You could kneel on a Sunday, when for example, you are a football player on the sidelines, proposing marriage to your loved one, asking for your wife's permission (come to think of it, prostration may be a better idea but then you will have no forewarning). Just kidding. Smiley

I would not over-analyze/dogmatize these things. The way I understand it, there were only two ways to react to the presence of God: erect or prostrate. However, you can see that kneeling may have become an alternative to prostrations amongst Orthodox who live in Muslim countries (too much like them!). Kneeling is also a sign of respect in many cultures that is halfway a prostration and standing erect, where standing erect shows equivalency, kneeling reflects subordination and prostration demonstrates abasement.  

So, as members of His body, we are given the privilege and right to stand in His presence as a witness to His Resurrection on the third day. You are right, sitting down would be a sign of disrespect but only for those who could stand up. There is no disrespect if you cannot sit up (ADDED) or IMHO if you are in physical discomfort or pain that disrupts your worship. Bottom line: these are small matters that are not that important in the scheme of things.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:20:40 PM by Second Chance » Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #71 on: August 17, 2011, 04:12:39 PM »

With reference to 19.   Sitting during worship:
At our local Church there is a young lady who is crippled and attends Church sitting in a wheelchair. I would not agree with objecting to her sitting in her wheelchair during worship.


Nowhere do I object to that. There is a difference between using economia for the sick and infirm, and letting everyone sit as a norm.
Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #72 on: August 17, 2011, 04:18:12 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #73 on: August 17, 2011, 04:21:20 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Did I ever say that it should be a deal-breaker? Like I said before. Its something that needs to change, but not a deal-breaker. Though it is something they would eventually have to change.

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct. But there is a difference between iconography and other art. In churches, it should be iconography, but if you want to paint something else with religious frescoes, then I have no problem with realistic paintings.
In fact, our house has western religious art in it. Do I believe that has a place in church? No... Should I kiss it? Definitely not... But is it beautiful? Yes...

The Sistine chapel is an absolutely beautiful work of art, and being a fan of the classical tradition, I love it. But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
Especially how he put real people's faces in the painting of the Last Judgement, including Leonardo Da Vinci being condemned by Christ to hell, even though it looks like its supposed to be St. Barnabus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Last_judgement.jpg
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:27:41 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #74 on: August 17, 2011, 04:36:26 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Did I ever say that it should be a deal-breaker? Like I said before. Its something that needs to change, but not a deal-breaker. Though it is something they would eventually have to change.

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct. But there is a difference between iconography and other art. In churches, it should be iconography, but if you want to paint something else with religious frescoes, then I have no problem with realistic paintings.
In fact, our house has western religious art in it. Do I believe that has a place in church? No... Should I kiss it? Definitely not... But is it beautiful? Yes...

The Sistine chapel is an absolutely beautiful work of art, and being a fan of the classical tradition, I love it. But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
Especially how he put real people's faces in the painting of the Last Judgement, including Leonardo Da Vinci being condemned by Christ to hell, even though it looks like its supposed to be St. Barnabus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Last_judgement.jpg

I agree that there is a good amount of western artwork that should not have been produced, but at the same time, something doesn't necessarily have to be eastern in order to glorify Christ.
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #75 on: August 17, 2011, 04:37:37 PM »

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct.
Would it be the monks of Athos or someone else who would decide if an icon is theologically correct?
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #76 on: August 17, 2011, 04:39:49 PM »


Like I said, we shouldn't destroy the existing ones, but over time, we probably ought to just repaint them in traditional fashions, and completely ban our iconographers from doing it again.

 laugh laugh laugh

You seem to be blissfully unaware that if the first iconographers took the same position you are taking now: there would be NO traditional iconography as you understand it today.

As your friends have said: you manage to turn the whole discussion into a: joke: well actually I say that.
Logged

orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #77 on: August 17, 2011, 04:40:58 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Did I ever say that it should be a deal-breaker? Like I said before. Its something that needs to change, but not a deal-breaker. Though it is something they would eventually have to change.

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct. But there is a difference between iconography and other art. In churches, it should be iconography, but if you want to paint something else with religious frescoes, then I have no problem with realistic paintings.
In fact, our house has western religious art in it. Do I believe that has a place in church? No... Should I kiss it? Definitely not... But is it beautiful? Yes...

The Sistine chapel is an absolutely beautiful work of art, and being a fan of the classical tradition, I love it. But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
Especially how he put real people's faces in the painting of the Last Judgement, including Leonardo Da Vinci being condemned by Christ to hell, even though it looks like its supposed to be St. Barnabus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Last_judgement.jpg

Devin does it strike you oddly how often you use the word I when speaking about and especially for the Church.

You do realize there is that whole Communion of Believers thing, right?
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #78 on: August 17, 2011, 04:42:06 PM »

With reference to 14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
I kind of agree with this, except that do you consider Gregorian chant to be heterodox? Also, would you condemn the use of musical instrumentation, except for bells, at DL ?
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:43:00 PM by stanley123 » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #79 on: August 17, 2011, 04:46:15 PM »

With reference to 14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
I kind of agree with this, except that do you consider Gregorian chant to be heterodox? Also, would you condemn the use of musical instrumentation, except for bells, at DL ?


Heterodox hymns?

Does that include all the beautiful Slavic/ethnic hymns that are sung at divine liturgies?...for one example?  And if they are to be preserved then what is wrong with theologically correct hymns from other WESTERN traditions:   Huh
Logged

stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #80 on: August 17, 2011, 04:52:10 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Did I ever say that it should be a deal-breaker? Like I said before. Its something that needs to change, but not a deal-breaker. Though it is something they would eventually have to change.

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct. But there is a difference between iconography and other art. In churches, it should be iconography, but if you want to paint something else with religious frescoes, then I have no problem with realistic paintings.
In fact, our house has western religious art in it. Do I believe that has a place in church? No... Should I kiss it? Definitely not... But is it beautiful? Yes...

The Sistine chapel is an absolutely beautiful work of art, and being a fan of the classical tradition, I love it. But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
Especially how he put real people's faces in the painting of the Last Judgement, including Leonardo Da Vinci being condemned by Christ to hell, even though it looks like its supposed to be St. Barnabus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Last_judgement.jpg

Devin does it strike you oddly how often you use the word I when speaking about and especially for the Church.

You do realize there is that whole Communion of Believers thing, right?
I think he is just giving his opinion on things as he sees them, which is what I am doing also.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #81 on: August 17, 2011, 04:55:56 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Did I ever say that it should be a deal-breaker? Like I said before. Its something that needs to change, but not a deal-breaker. Though it is something they would eventually have to change.

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct. But there is a difference between iconography and other art. In churches, it should be iconography, but if you want to paint something else with religious frescoes, then I have no problem with realistic paintings.
In fact, our house has western religious art in it. Do I believe that has a place in church? No... Should I kiss it? Definitely not... But is it beautiful? Yes...

The Sistine chapel is an absolutely beautiful work of art, and being a fan of the classical tradition, I love it. But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
Especially how he put real people's faces in the painting of the Last Judgement, including Leonardo Da Vinci being condemned by Christ to hell, even though it looks like its supposed to be St. Barnabus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Last_judgement.jpg

Devin does it strike you oddly how often you use the word I when speaking about and especially for the Church.

You do realize there is that whole Communion of Believers thing, right?
I think he is just giving his opinion on things as he sees them, which is what I am doing also.

And strangely, no matter certain you both are, he remains frequently wrong.



« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 05:09:08 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #82 on: August 17, 2011, 04:56:49 PM »

With reference to 14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
I kind of agree with this, except that do you consider Gregorian chant to be heterodox? Also, would you condemn the use of musical instrumentation, except for bells, at DL ?


Heterodox hymns?

Does that include all the beautiful Slavic/ethnic hymns that are sung at divine liturgies?...for one example?  And if they are to be preserved then what is wrong with theologically correct hymns from other WESTERN traditions:   Huh
Right. That would be my question on #14 also. Although I can see the objection to some of the more secular hymns as being irreverent to some extent.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 04:59:58 PM by stanley123 » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #83 on: August 17, 2011, 05:00:42 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Did I ever say that it should be a deal-breaker? Like I said before. Its something that needs to change, but not a deal-breaker. Though it is something they would eventually have to change.

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct. But there is a difference between iconography and other art. In churches, it should be iconography, but if you want to paint something else with religious frescoes, then I have no problem with realistic paintings.
In fact, our house has western religious art in it. Do I believe that has a place in church? No... Should I kiss it? Definitely not... But is it beautiful? Yes...

The Sistine chapel is an absolutely beautiful work of art, and being a fan of the classical tradition, I love it. But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
Especially how he put real people's faces in the painting of the Last Judgement, including Leonardo Da Vinci being condemned by Christ to hell, even though it looks like its supposed to be St. Barnabus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Last_judgement.jpg

Devin does it strike you oddly how often you use the word I when speaking about and especially for the Church.

You do realize there is that whole Communion of Believers thing, right?
I think he is just giving his opinion on things as he sees them, which is what I am doing also.

And strangely, no matter certain you both are, you remain frequently wrong.




Which of my opinions is wrong?
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #84 on: August 17, 2011, 05:01:31 PM »

With reference to 14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
I kind of agree with this, except that do you consider Gregorian chant to be heterodox? Also, would you condemn the use of musical instrumentation, except for bells, at DL ?
All it means is that they should stop including things like Protestant hymns into their services. It would also include having "composers" redo every service every time. Kind of the way they were doing things with Bach, etc...

I have no problem with such music as long as its used only outside of Liturgy. Look at Metropolitan Hilarion's compositions, like his St. Matthews Passion. Its absolutely beautiful, but it cannot be used in Liturgy.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #85 on: August 17, 2011, 05:02:24 PM »

With reference to 14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
I kind of agree with this, except that do you consider Gregorian chant to be heterodox? Also, would you condemn the use of musical instrumentation, except for bells, at DL ?


Heterodox hymns?

Does that include all the beautiful Slavic/ethnic hymns that are sung at divine liturgies?...for one example?  And if they are to be preserved then what is wrong with theologically correct hymns from other WESTERN traditions:   Huh
Right. That would be my question on #14 also. Although I can see the objection to some of the more secular hymns as being irreverent to some extent.

Isn't "secular hymn" something of an oxymoron?
Logged

stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #86 on: August 17, 2011, 05:06:52 PM »

With reference to 14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
I kind of agree with this, except that do you consider Gregorian chant to be heterodox? Also, would you condemn the use of musical instrumentation, except for bells, at DL ?


Heterodox hymns?

Does that include all the beautiful Slavic/ethnic hymns that are sung at divine liturgies?...for one example?  And if they are to be preserved then what is wrong with theologically correct hymns from other WESTERN traditions:   Huh
Right. That would be my question on #14 also. Although I can see the objection to some of the more secular hymns as being irreverent to some extent.

Isn't "secular hymn" something of an oxymoron?
Yes, to some extent. I was thinking of the blasting rock music, with gigantic speakers and shirtless bearded longhairs, girls in short skirts and low cut blouses,  blasting away and singing and swaying with their guitars and electronic organs at the altar during a Mass.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #87 on: August 17, 2011, 05:08:22 PM »

Why should he? I never said it should be excommunicated.


Then it's probably not worth maintaining a schism over.

I believe that there are a number of things on that list that should be done away with (Papal universal jurisdiction for example), but there are a number of things that just simply need to be reevaluated and possibly reformulated (unless you think they were wrong to anathematize Protestantism at the council of Trent) and others are simply a western cultural expression of the same faith (transubstantiation). Please forgive me for being too lazy to go over the list point by point and share my opinion at this time.
Did I ever say that it should be a deal-breaker? Like I said before. Its something that needs to change, but not a deal-breaker. Though it is something they would eventually have to change.

I have no problem with art being painted in this fashion, as long as it is theologically correct. But there is a difference between iconography and other art. In churches, it should be iconography, but if you want to paint something else with religious frescoes, then I have no problem with realistic paintings.
In fact, our house has western religious art in it. Do I believe that has a place in church? No... Should I kiss it? Definitely not... But is it beautiful? Yes...

The Sistine chapel is an absolutely beautiful work of art, and being a fan of the classical tradition, I love it. But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
Especially how he put real people's faces in the painting of the Last Judgement, including Leonardo Da Vinci being condemned by Christ to hell, even though it looks like its supposed to be St. Barnabus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Last_judgement.jpg

Devin does it strike you oddly how often you use the word I when speaking about and especially for the Church.

You do realize there is that whole Communion of Believers thing, right?
I think he is just giving his opinion on things as he sees them, which is what I am doing also.

And strangely, no matter certain you both are, you remain frequently wrong.




Which of my opinions is wrong?

Stanley, I apologize. I ain't gonna get into the reasons too much. But I started my day misreading something very poorly and having to apologize for it, this time for typing so.

I'll see if I can edit it.

I meant:

And strangely, no matter certain you both are, he remains frequently wrong.

Point being, an RC is again making an OC look silly.

Again apologies. I'll try to edit the post.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,022


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #88 on: August 17, 2011, 05:13:05 PM »

Tiny aside here: in the U.S., we have a song called the "Battle Hymn of the Republic."  Smiley It may qualify as a secular hymn, if there can be such a thing. Although it is replete with religious imagery, it is not today confined to use by one church, but is almost entirely associated with marching bands and patriotic occasions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_Hymn_of_the_Republic
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,022


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #89 on: August 17, 2011, 05:13:38 PM »

Sorry, double post   Embarrassed
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 05:14:27 PM by biro » Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #90 on: August 17, 2011, 05:16:09 PM »

With reference to 14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
I kind of agree with this, except that do you consider Gregorian chant to be heterodox? Also, would you condemn the use of musical instrumentation, except for bells, at DL ?


Heterodox hymns?

Does that include all the beautiful Slavic/ethnic hymns that are sung at divine liturgies?...for one example?  And if they are to be preserved then what is wrong with theologically correct hymns from other WESTERN traditions:   Huh
Right. That would be my question on #14 also. Although I can see the objection to some of the more secular hymns as being irreverent to some extent.

Isn't "secular hymn" something of an oxymoron?
Yes, to some extent. I was thinking of the blasting rock music, with gigantic speakers and shirtless bearded longhairs, girls in short skirts and low cut blouses,  blasting away and singing and swaying with their guitars and electronic organs at the altar during a Mass.

If that were the norm, I'd worry.  But it is not.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #91 on: August 17, 2011, 05:18:01 PM »

Tiny aside here: in the U.S., we have a song called the "Battle Hymn of the Republic."  Smiley It may qualify as a secular hymn, if there can be such a thing. Although it is replete with religious imagery, it is not today confined to use by one church, but is almost entirely associated with marching bands and patriotic occasions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_Hymn_of_the_Republic

Yes.  And once I wrote an "Ode to Pansy"...Pansy being my cat.  One wonders if it qualifies as an Ode: strictly speaking.
Logged

88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #92 on: August 17, 2011, 05:45:26 PM »

Tiny aside here: in the U.S., we have a song called the "Battle Hymn of the Republic."  Smiley It may qualify as a secular hymn, if there can be such a thing. Although it is replete with religious imagery, it is not today confined to use by one church, but is almost entirely associated with marching bands and patriotic occasions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_Hymn_of_the_Republic

And completely unsuitable for Liturgical use.

(think about it, if a beautiful hymn like O Pure Virgin isn't permitted for liturgical use, why should anything that isn't even Orthodox be allowed?)
Logged
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #93 on: August 17, 2011, 05:55:31 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

How did this happen?
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,360



« Reply #94 on: August 17, 2011, 06:01:07 PM »

But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
So if you walked into this church you would be filled with disgust?

Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 750



« Reply #95 on: August 17, 2011, 06:03:34 PM »

Like I said...

Kneeling on Sundays...
Pews...
Realistic/Westernized Icons...
Self-Flagellation...
Some modern teachings regarding Bishops that have arisen... (can't really remember atm specifically)
etc...

Are all things that need to be removed from the Orthodox Church.

I thought this topic was about what the Catholic Church would have to change in order to reunite with the Orthodox.  Now it appears that you have moved on to your personal agenda for Orthodox house-cleaning.  Plenty of Eastern and Western rite Orthodox churches have pews - what's the big deal?  Sounds like you would freeze Orthodox art, music, and architecture at some pre-conceived point in time.  That's a certain recipe for an ecclesiastical museum piece, not the living Body of Christ.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:04:58 PM by James2 » Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #96 on: August 17, 2011, 06:04:52 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

How did this happen?

I see you also ignore the posts of ozgeorge, Shanghaiski, Cymbyz, Habte, Robert W and FatherHLL...
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #97 on: August 17, 2011, 06:06:04 PM »

But on the ecclesiastical level, its absolutely disgusting and shouldn't have been permitted.
So if you walked into this church you would be filled with disgust?



Disgusted with the painting being in a church, yes... It is beautiful, but not befitting a church.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #98 on: August 17, 2011, 06:09:24 PM »

Like I said...

Kneeling on Sundays...
Pews...
Realistic/Westernized Icons...
Self-Flagellation...
Some modern teachings regarding Bishops that have arisen... (can't really remember atm specifically)
etc...

Are all things that need to be removed from the Orthodox Church.

I thought this topic was about what the Catholic Church would have to change in order to reunite with the Orthodox.  Now it appears that you have moved on to your personal agenda for Orthodox house-cleaning.  Plenty of Eastern and Western rite Orthodox churches have pews - what's the big deal?  Sounds like you would freeze Orthodox art, music, and architecture at some pre-conceived point in time.  That's a certain recipe for an ecclesiastical museum piece, not the living Body of Christ.

I never said freeze it. But there are certain boundaries which we must stay within. Western art and music are outside of those boundaries.

You act like you are trying to justify the West. Guess what? They are in schism from the Holy Church and cannot be justified.

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.

When we attend the Divine Liturgy, we are literally standing before the throne of God in heaven. To sit is to consider ones-self equal to God. (of course, economia is applied for the sick and infirm, but otherwise...) That is how the ancient Christians understood it, and that is how we should understand it.

We aren't the Roman Catholic Church, and we don't believe in their idea of doctrinal development. The church grows and some things change. But there are boundaries you must stay within. We don't completely bastardize our faith just because we think the Holy Spirit is guiding new innovations and developments.

Satan started misleading the Western Christians before the schism, and once they lost the armor of God given to the church, he started inflicting devastating wounds. It is the job of the Orthodox Church to help nurse those wounds inflicted on Western Christians, but that doesn't mean we allow those wounds to enter into our own body without being healed first.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:13:19 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
William
Muted
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,354


« Reply #99 on: August 17, 2011, 06:12:28 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

How did this happen?

I see you also ignore the posts of ozgeorge, Shanghaiski, Cymbyz, Habte, Robert W and FatherHLL...

No, I read every post in that thread.

The point is that you implied that someone allergic to alcohol should still commune. This is is clearly not the case, as the thread I linked proves. People suffer anaphylaxis from the Eucharist. It happens.

Do you think that the OP of that thread should have kept communing his daughter?
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #100 on: August 17, 2011, 06:14:42 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

How did this happen?

I see you also ignore the posts of ozgeorge, Shanghaiski, Cymbyz, Habte, Robert W and FatherHLL...

No, I read every post in that thread.

The point is that you implied that someone allergic to alcohol should still commune. This is is clearly not the case, as the thread I linked proves. People suffer anaphylaxis from the Eucharist. It happens.

Do you think that the OP of that thread should have kept communing his daughter?

Depends, as was said in the thread, they should find the cause of it from a doctor. Then they should consult their Priest & Bishop.
Logged
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 #101 on: August 17, 2011, 06:22:42 PM »

Wait, why are we hung up on kneeling on Sundays?

... (yes, I know there are canons) ...
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #102 on: August 17, 2011, 06:40:22 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Why would I want to test God? You know, testing God almost never ends up in a good way for the person testing him.
Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

How did this happen?

I see you also ignore the posts of ozgeorge, Shanghaiski, Cymbyz, Habte, Robert W and FatherHLL...

No, I read every post in that thread.

The point is that you implied that someone allergic to alcohol should still commune. This is is clearly not the case, as the thread I linked proves. People suffer anaphylaxis from the Eucharist. It happens.

Do you think that the OP of that thread should have kept communing his daughter?

Depends, as was said in the thread, they should find the cause of it from a doctor. Then they should consult their Priest & Bishop.

Why would I want to test God? You know, testing God almost never ends up in a good way for the person testing him.

Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #103 on: August 17, 2011, 06:43:56 PM »

Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.

 Huh
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:44:48 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

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

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



« Reply #104 on: August 17, 2011, 06:46:55 PM »

Musical instruments and dancing - is outrage!
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #105 on: August 17, 2011, 06:48:10 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

How did this happen?

I see you also ignore the posts of ozgeorge, Shanghaiski, Cymbyz, Habte, Robert W and FatherHLL...

You really have some trouble reading a single post, be careful with an entire thread. Did you actually read what happened?

Dude, I thought you might be doing some ol' fashion'd pot stirrin'. But it looks like you are in earnest.

That is unfortunate. Best of luck on your Crusade. I advise watching the following before you go out claiming more land for your religion:



Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #106 on: August 17, 2011, 06:49:12 PM »


Disgusting! How dare they celebrate Christ's resurrection in such a manner? Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:51:07 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Xenia1918
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Praying for Divine guidance
Posts: 569



« Reply #107 on: August 17, 2011, 06:52:06 PM »

#2, 6 and 7 will never be repealed because they were declared as de fide dogmas, which Catholics must believe on pain of mortal sin.

Then again, the novus ordo church of the people of God (which passes for the Roman Catholic Church since Vatican II) might very well change it. They've changed almost everything else authentically Roman Catholic. Grin
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:53:11 PM by Xenia1918 » Logged

"O God, enlarge within us the sense of fellowship with all living things, our brothers the animals to whom Thou gavest the earth as their home in common with us..." (from the Prayer of St Basil the Great)

REAL RC: http://www.traditionalmass.org
REAL OC: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #108 on: August 17, 2011, 06:52:17 PM »


Nice! Melodist! This reminds me of something I've been wanting to post around here.

Great video.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #109 on: August 17, 2011, 06:53:50 PM »

Beautiful.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #110 on: August 17, 2011, 06:54:13 PM »

Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.

 Huh

Well some one can follow this thread and is actually reading your words Devin, that makes things more problematic for you.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 06:55:09 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #111 on: August 17, 2011, 07:35:50 PM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #112 on: August 17, 2011, 07:36:05 PM »

Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.

 Huh

Well some one can follow this thread and is actually reading your words Devin, that makes things more problematic for you.

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #113 on: August 17, 2011, 07:37:41 PM »


Did I ever mention musical instruments and dancing?

BTW, I love that video, it is on my IPod.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #114 on: August 17, 2011, 07:38:48 PM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?

I would love to do just that, but I don't have the ability to do so. Some day, hopefully it'll happen.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #115 on: August 17, 2011, 07:40:34 PM »

Wait this looks like a Catholic NO Mass service?! What! No it is an Orthodox service!!!! Wow!!
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #116 on: August 17, 2011, 07:42:18 PM »

With reference to 4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants. I would not agree with this as a requirement to receive Holy Communion. It could be an alternative, but not a requirement. This is because some people, such as alcoholics, are unable to take alcoholic beverages.

Nein.

This is crazy. The amount of alcohol you are going to get in Communing is almost nil.

No one is going on a bender after that. There is more alcohol content in many foods I have seen plenty of recovering "real" alcoholics, myself included eat and not go nuts.

Now, you might want to skip washing down the Eucharist with a gulps of the manny. But at my parish we don't even have that anymore.
For those who have a true alcohol allergy, less than an ounce of alcohol can send a person into anaphylactic shock.
I'm guessing you're one of them also that believes AIDs, the Flu, and other such illnesses can be transmitted through the Eucharist... Ugh...

How did this happen?

I see you also ignore the posts of ozgeorge, Shanghaiski, Cymbyz, Habte, Robert W and FatherHLL...

You really have some trouble reading a single post, be careful with an entire thread. Did you actually read what happened?

Dude, I thought you might be doing some ol' fashion'd pot stirrin'. But it looks like you are in earnest.

That is unfortunate. Best of luck on your Crusade. I advise watching the following before you go out claiming more land for your religion:]

I did read what happened and the decision that was made. It didn't contradict anything I said, or those I mentioned said... Funny how you were at odds with them even in that thread. Why does it seem that you always seem to find yourself at odds with traditional Orthodox beliefs and teachings? Are you afraid of unconditionally accepting our beliefs and teachings and accepting the wisdom of Christ's Church?
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 07:42:38 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #117 on: August 17, 2011, 07:43:03 PM »

Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.

 Huh

Well some one can follow this thread and is actually reading your words Devin, that makes things more problematic for you.

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #118 on: August 17, 2011, 07:43:13 PM »

Wait this looks like a Catholic NO Mass service?! What! No it is an Orthodox service!!!! Wow!!

No it most certainly doesn't, it is far more beautiful than the Novus Ordo.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #119 on: August 17, 2011, 07:45:12 PM »

Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.

 Huh

Well some one can follow this thread and is actually reading your words Devin, that makes things more problematic for you.

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.
What exactly is the problem, then.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #120 on: August 17, 2011, 07:45:21 PM »

Possibly, but how do you know this? I don't think it has ever been done with Orthodox sacraments.

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.

 Huh

Well some one can follow this thread and is actually reading your words Devin, that makes things more problematic for you.

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?

You might want to read this:

Quote
Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics recognize at least seven Sacraments or Mysteries: The Eucharist, Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Penance, Marriage and Holy Oil for the sick (which the Latins have traditionally called "Extreme Unction" and reserved for the dying).

Concerning the Sacraments in general, the Orthodox teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis). Roman Catholicism believes that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ."

At the same time, the Latins interpret the Sacraments in a legal and philosophical way. Hence, in the Eucharist, using the right material things (bread and wine) and pronouncing the correct formula, changes their substance (transubstantiation) into the Body and Blood of Christ. The visible elements or this and all Sacraments are merely "signs" of the presence of God.

The Orthodox call the Eucharist "the mystical Supper." What the priest and the faithful consume is mysteriously the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive Him under the forms of bread and wine, because it would be wholly repugnant to eat "real" human flesh and drink "real" human blood.

According to Roman Catholic teachings about the Sacraments (mystagogy), a person becomes a member of the Church through Baptism. "Original sin" is washed away. Orthodoxy teaches the same, but the idea of an "original sin" or "inherited guilt" (from Adam) has no part in her thinking. More will be said later on this matter.

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Sacrament of "Confirmation" and "Chrismation" both mean the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Latins delay "confirming" (with "first communion") baptized infants not more than seven years, that is, until the time they have some appreciation of the gift of God.

The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water, the "new Christian" rising from the water into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which leads to union with God. Such is the purpose of membership in the Church.

Ordination is the ceremony which, by the grace and calling of God, elevates a man to the priesthood. The sacerdotal priesthood has three orders: Bishop, presbyter (elder) and deacon. All Christians are priests by virtue of the baptism into Christ Who is priest, prophet and king - for which reason St. Peter refers to the Church as a "royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:9). The bishop is the "high priest," the "president of the Eucharist and all the Mysteries. Presbyters and deacons are his assistants. The Latins hold that the presbyter acts "in the person of Christ" when, in fact, he does no more than represent the bishop who is "the living icon of Christ."

Strictly speaking, Penance - sometimes called "Confession" - should only be received by the believer as a means of re-admission to the Church. For a long time, Penance, or confession of sins, prayer and fasting was employed only for those who had been expelled from the Church ("excommunication") or who had voluntarily departed (apostasy). The present practice is to receive Penance from a bishop or presbyter for some serious sin before receiving Holy Communion.

Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics consider Penance as a Sacrament. Each has different customs surrounding it, such as the confessional booth so common among the latter.

For Roman Catholics, Holy Matrimony is a binding, ostensibly an unbreakable, contract. The man and the woman marry each other with the "church" (bishop or priest) standing as a witness to it. Hence, no divorce under any conditions - no divorce but annulment of the marriage contract if some canonical defect in it may be found which renders it null and void (as if it never took place).

In Orthodoxy, Holy Matrimony is not a contract; it is the mysterious or mystical union of a man and woman - in imitation of Christ and the Church - in the presence of "the whole People of God" through her bishop or his presbyter. Divorce is likewise forbidden, but, as a concession to human weakness, it is allowed for adultery. Second and third marriages are permitted - not as a legal matter - out of mercy, a further concession to human weakness (e.g., after the death of a spouse). This Sacrament, as all Sacraments or Mysteries, is completed by the Eucharist, as St. Dionysius the Areopagite says.

As already mentioned, the Latins conceive Extreme Unction as the final Sacrament, the Sacrament which prepares the believer for death, purgatory and the Age to Come. In Orthodoxy, Holy Oil is received for healing. Often sickness is caused by sin; therefore, Holy Oil or Unction involved Confession of sins. At the end of the rite, the anointed receives Holy Communion.

The Orthodox Church also recognizes kingship, monasticism, blessings of the water, etc. as Mysteries.

Father Michael Azkoul

St. Catherine Mission, St. Louis, MO

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html
Logged
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 #121 on: August 17, 2011, 07:51:51 PM »

Wait this looks like a Catholic NO Mass service?! What! No it is an Orthodox service!!!! Wow!!

No it most certainly doesn't, it is far more beautiful than the Novus Ordo.

Devin, there are some videos on youtube of the Novus Ordo Mass being celebrated ad orientem, in Latin, in Gregorian chant, with the use of incense, without altar girls or "extraordinary" lay ministers. I'll find some for you once I get home from work if you'd like.

Is it safe to assume your quarrel is with the abuse of the freedoms allowed to the Roman Church's priests under the Novus Ordo rubrics rather than with the Mass itself?
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #122 on: August 17, 2011, 07:52:34 PM »

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?

You might want to read this:

Quote
Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics recognize at least seven Sacraments or Mysteries: The Eucharist, Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Penance, Marriage and Holy Oil for the sick (which the Latins have traditionally called "Extreme Unction" and reserved for the dying).

Concerning the Sacraments in general, the Orthodox teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis). Roman Catholicism believes that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ."

At the same time, the Latins interpret the Sacraments in a legal and philosophical way. Hence, in the Eucharist, using the right material things (bread and wine) and pronouncing the correct formula, changes their substance (transubstantiation) into the Body and Blood of Christ. The visible elements or this and all Sacraments are merely "signs" of the presence of God.

The Orthodox call the Eucharist "the mystical Supper." What the priest and the faithful consume is mysteriously the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive Him under the forms of bread and wine, because it would be wholly repugnant to eat "real" human flesh and drink "real" human blood.

According to Roman Catholic teachings about the Sacraments (mystagogy), a person becomes a member of the Church through Baptism. "Original sin" is washed away. Orthodoxy teaches the same, but the idea of an "original sin" or "inherited guilt" (from Adam) has no part in her thinking. More will be said later on this matter.

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Sacrament of "Confirmation" and "Chrismation" both mean the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Latins delay "confirming" (with "first communion") baptized infants not more than seven years, that is, until the time they have some appreciation of the gift of God.

The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water, the "new Christian" rising from the water into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which leads to union with God. Such is the purpose of membership in the Church.

Ordination is the ceremony which, by the grace and calling of God, elevates a man to the priesthood. The sacerdotal priesthood has three orders: Bishop, presbyter (elder) and deacon. All Christians are priests by virtue of the baptism into Christ Who is priest, prophet and king - for which reason St. Peter refers to the Church as a "royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:9). The bishop is the "high priest," the "president of the Eucharist and all the Mysteries. Presbyters and deacons are his assistants. The Latins hold that the presbyter acts "in the person of Christ" when, in fact, he does no more than represent the bishop who is "the living icon of Christ."

Strictly speaking, Penance - sometimes called "Confession" - should only be received by the believer as a means of re-admission to the Church. For a long time, Penance, or confession of sins, prayer and fasting was employed only for those who had been expelled from the Church ("excommunication") or who had voluntarily departed (apostasy). The present practice is to receive Penance from a bishop or presbyter for some serious sin before receiving Holy Communion.

Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics consider Penance as a Sacrament. Each has different customs surrounding it, such as the confessional booth so common among the latter.

For Roman Catholics, Holy Matrimony is a binding, ostensibly an unbreakable, contract. The man and the woman marry each other with the "church" (bishop or priest) standing as a witness to it. Hence, no divorce under any conditions - no divorce but annulment of the marriage contract if some canonical defect in it may be found which renders it null and void (as if it never took place).

In Orthodoxy, Holy Matrimony is not a contract; it is the mysterious or mystical union of a man and woman - in imitation of Christ and the Church - in the presence of "the whole People of God" through her bishop or his presbyter. Divorce is likewise forbidden, but, as a concession to human weakness, it is allowed for adultery. Second and third marriages are permitted - not as a legal matter - out of mercy, a further concession to human weakness (e.g., after the death of a spouse). This Sacrament, as all Sacraments or Mysteries, is completed by the Eucharist, as St. Dionysius the Areopagite says.

As already mentioned, the Latins conceive Extreme Unction as the final Sacrament, the Sacrament which prepares the believer for death, purgatory and the Age to Come. In Orthodoxy, Holy Oil is received for healing. Often sickness is caused by sin; therefore, Holy Oil or Unction involved Confession of sins. At the end of the rite, the anointed receives Holy Communion.

The Orthodox Church also recognizes kingship, monasticism, blessings of the water, etc. as Mysteries.

Father Michael Azkoul

St. Catherine Mission, St. Louis, MO

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

Ok, but what makes the Catholic understanding defective? What in your grand opinion must change about the Catholic view of the Sacraments?
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #123 on: August 17, 2011, 07:55:23 PM »

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?

You might want to read this:

Quote
Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics recognize at least seven Sacraments or Mysteries: The Eucharist, Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Penance, Marriage and Holy Oil for the sick (which the Latins have traditionally called "Extreme Unction" and reserved for the dying).

Concerning the Sacraments in general, the Orthodox teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis). Roman Catholicism believes that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ."

At the same time, the Latins interpret the Sacraments in a legal and philosophical way. Hence, in the Eucharist, using the right material things (bread and wine) and pronouncing the correct formula, changes their substance (transubstantiation) into the Body and Blood of Christ. The visible elements or this and all Sacraments are merely "signs" of the presence of God.

The Orthodox call the Eucharist "the mystical Supper." What the priest and the faithful consume is mysteriously the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive Him under the forms of bread and wine, because it would be wholly repugnant to eat "real" human flesh and drink "real" human blood.

According to Roman Catholic teachings about the Sacraments (mystagogy), a person becomes a member of the Church through Baptism. "Original sin" is washed away. Orthodoxy teaches the same, but the idea of an "original sin" or "inherited guilt" (from Adam) has no part in her thinking. More will be said later on this matter.

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Sacrament of "Confirmation" and "Chrismation" both mean the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Latins delay "confirming" (with "first communion") baptized infants not more than seven years, that is, until the time they have some appreciation of the gift of God.

The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water, the "new Christian" rising from the water into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which leads to union with God. Such is the purpose of membership in the Church.

Ordination is the ceremony which, by the grace and calling of God, elevates a man to the priesthood. The sacerdotal priesthood has three orders: Bishop, presbyter (elder) and deacon. All Christians are priests by virtue of the baptism into Christ Who is priest, prophet and king - for which reason St. Peter refers to the Church as a "royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:9). The bishop is the "high priest," the "president of the Eucharist and all the Mysteries. Presbyters and deacons are his assistants. The Latins hold that the presbyter acts "in the person of Christ" when, in fact, he does no more than represent the bishop who is "the living icon of Christ."

Strictly speaking, Penance - sometimes called "Confession" - should only be received by the believer as a means of re-admission to the Church. For a long time, Penance, or confession of sins, prayer and fasting was employed only for those who had been expelled from the Church ("excommunication") or who had voluntarily departed (apostasy). The present practice is to receive Penance from a bishop or presbyter for some serious sin before receiving Holy Communion.

Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics consider Penance as a Sacrament. Each has different customs surrounding it, such as the confessional booth so common among the latter.

For Roman Catholics, Holy Matrimony is a binding, ostensibly an unbreakable, contract. The man and the woman marry each other with the "church" (bishop or priest) standing as a witness to it. Hence, no divorce under any conditions - no divorce but annulment of the marriage contract if some canonical defect in it may be found which renders it null and void (as if it never took place).

In Orthodoxy, Holy Matrimony is not a contract; it is the mysterious or mystical union of a man and woman - in imitation of Christ and the Church - in the presence of "the whole People of God" through her bishop or his presbyter. Divorce is likewise forbidden, but, as a concession to human weakness, it is allowed for adultery. Second and third marriages are permitted - not as a legal matter - out of mercy, a further concession to human weakness (e.g., after the death of a spouse). This Sacrament, as all Sacraments or Mysteries, is completed by the Eucharist, as St. Dionysius the Areopagite says.

As already mentioned, the Latins conceive Extreme Unction as the final Sacrament, the Sacrament which prepares the believer for death, purgatory and the Age to Come. In Orthodoxy, Holy Oil is received for healing. Often sickness is caused by sin; therefore, Holy Oil or Unction involved Confession of sins. At the end of the rite, the anointed receives Holy Communion.

The Orthodox Church also recognizes kingship, monasticism, blessings of the water, etc. as Mysteries.

Father Michael Azkoul

St. Catherine Mission, St. Louis, MO

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

Ok, but what makes the Catholic understanding defective? What in your grand opinion must change about the Catholic view of the Sacraments?

Did you read that article? And the differences between our understandings? THOSE are the problems they need to change.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #124 on: August 17, 2011, 08:00:36 PM »

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?

You might want to read this:

Quote
Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics recognize at least seven Sacraments or Mysteries: The Eucharist, Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Penance, Marriage and Holy Oil for the sick (which the Latins have traditionally called "Extreme Unction" and reserved for the dying).

Concerning the Sacraments in general, the Orthodox teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis). Roman Catholicism believes that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ."

At the same time, the Latins interpret the Sacraments in a legal and philosophical way. Hence, in the Eucharist, using the right material things (bread and wine) and pronouncing the correct formula, changes their substance (transubstantiation) into the Body and Blood of Christ. The visible elements or this and all Sacraments are merely "signs" of the presence of God.

The Orthodox call the Eucharist "the mystical Supper." What the priest and the faithful consume is mysteriously the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive Him under the forms of bread and wine, because it would be wholly repugnant to eat "real" human flesh and drink "real" human blood.

According to Roman Catholic teachings about the Sacraments (mystagogy), a person becomes a member of the Church through Baptism. "Original sin" is washed away. Orthodoxy teaches the same, but the idea of an "original sin" or "inherited guilt" (from Adam) has no part in her thinking. More will be said later on this matter.

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Sacrament of "Confirmation" and "Chrismation" both mean the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Latins delay "confirming" (with "first communion") baptized infants not more than seven years, that is, until the time they have some appreciation of the gift of God.

The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water, the "new Christian" rising from the water into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which leads to union with God. Such is the purpose of membership in the Church.

Ordination is the ceremony which, by the grace and calling of God, elevates a man to the priesthood. The sacerdotal priesthood has three orders: Bishop, presbyter (elder) and deacon. All Christians are priests by virtue of the baptism into Christ Who is priest, prophet and king - for which reason St. Peter refers to the Church as a "royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:9). The bishop is the "high priest," the "president of the Eucharist and all the Mysteries. Presbyters and deacons are his assistants. The Latins hold that the presbyter acts "in the person of Christ" when, in fact, he does no more than represent the bishop who is "the living icon of Christ."

Strictly speaking, Penance - sometimes called "Confession" - should only be received by the believer as a means of re-admission to the Church. For a long time, Penance, or confession of sins, prayer and fasting was employed only for those who had been expelled from the Church ("excommunication") or who had voluntarily departed (apostasy). The present practice is to receive Penance from a bishop or presbyter for some serious sin before receiving Holy Communion.

Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics consider Penance as a Sacrament. Each has different customs surrounding it, such as the confessional booth so common among the latter.

For Roman Catholics, Holy Matrimony is a binding, ostensibly an unbreakable, contract. The man and the woman marry each other with the "church" (bishop or priest) standing as a witness to it. Hence, no divorce under any conditions - no divorce but annulment of the marriage contract if some canonical defect in it may be found which renders it null and void (as if it never took place).

In Orthodoxy, Holy Matrimony is not a contract; it is the mysterious or mystical union of a man and woman - in imitation of Christ and the Church - in the presence of "the whole People of God" through her bishop or his presbyter. Divorce is likewise forbidden, but, as a concession to human weakness, it is allowed for adultery. Second and third marriages are permitted - not as a legal matter - out of mercy, a further concession to human weakness (e.g., after the death of a spouse). This Sacrament, as all Sacraments or Mysteries, is completed by the Eucharist, as St. Dionysius the Areopagite says.

As already mentioned, the Latins conceive Extreme Unction as the final Sacrament, the Sacrament which prepares the believer for death, purgatory and the Age to Come. In Orthodoxy, Holy Oil is received for healing. Often sickness is caused by sin; therefore, Holy Oil or Unction involved Confession of sins. At the end of the rite, the anointed receives Holy Communion.

The Orthodox Church also recognizes kingship, monasticism, blessings of the water, etc. as Mysteries.

Father Michael Azkoul

St. Catherine Mission, St. Louis, MO

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

Ok, but what makes the Catholic understanding defective? What in your grand opinion must change about the Catholic view of the Sacraments?

Did you read that article? And the differences between our understandings? THOSE are the problems they need to change.
OK, I see it now. Sorry about that. I was distracted when I wrote the entry. Thanks.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #125 on: August 17, 2011, 08:01:00 PM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?
It's pointless. Zeal without knowledge comes to mind. Now as if Devin is gonna be the one asked to set the condition if such re-union were to happen. It's just another virtual reality game of his. He likes playing those.
Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #126 on: August 17, 2011, 08:03:31 PM »

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?

You might want to read this:

Quote
Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics recognize at least seven Sacraments or Mysteries: The Eucharist, Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Penance, Marriage and Holy Oil for the sick (which the Latins have traditionally called "Extreme Unction" and reserved for the dying).

Concerning the Sacraments in general, the Orthodox teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis). Roman Catholicism believes that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ."

At the same time, the Latins interpret the Sacraments in a legal and philosophical way. Hence, in the Eucharist, using the right material things (bread and wine) and pronouncing the correct formula, changes their substance (transubstantiation) into the Body and Blood of Christ. The visible elements or this and all Sacraments are merely "signs" of the presence of God.

The Orthodox call the Eucharist "the mystical Supper." What the priest and the faithful consume is mysteriously the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive Him under the forms of bread and wine, because it would be wholly repugnant to eat "real" human flesh and drink "real" human blood.

According to Roman Catholic teachings about the Sacraments (mystagogy), a person becomes a member of the Church through Baptism. "Original sin" is washed away. Orthodoxy teaches the same, but the idea of an "original sin" or "inherited guilt" (from Adam) has no part in her thinking. More will be said later on this matter.

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Sacrament of "Confirmation" and "Chrismation" both mean the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Latins delay "confirming" (with "first communion") baptized infants not more than seven years, that is, until the time they have some appreciation of the gift of God.

The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water, the "new Christian" rising from the water into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which leads to union with God. Such is the purpose of membership in the Church.

Ordination is the ceremony which, by the grace and calling of God, elevates a man to the priesthood. The sacerdotal priesthood has three orders: Bishop, presbyter (elder) and deacon. All Christians are priests by virtue of the baptism into Christ Who is priest, prophet and king - for which reason St. Peter refers to the Church as a "royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:9). The bishop is the "high priest," the "president of the Eucharist and all the Mysteries. Presbyters and deacons are his assistants. The Latins hold that the presbyter acts "in the person of Christ" when, in fact, he does no more than represent the bishop who is "the living icon of Christ."

Strictly speaking, Penance - sometimes called "Confession" - should only be received by the believer as a means of re-admission to the Church. For a long time, Penance, or confession of sins, prayer and fasting was employed only for those who had been expelled from the Church ("excommunication") or who had voluntarily departed (apostasy). The present practice is to receive Penance from a bishop or presbyter for some serious sin before receiving Holy Communion.

Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics consider Penance as a Sacrament. Each has different customs surrounding it, such as the confessional booth so common among the latter.

For Roman Catholics, Holy Matrimony is a binding, ostensibly an unbreakable, contract. The man and the woman marry each other with the "church" (bishop or priest) standing as a witness to it. Hence, no divorce under any conditions - no divorce but annulment of the marriage contract if some canonical defect in it may be found which renders it null and void (as if it never took place).

In Orthodoxy, Holy Matrimony is not a contract; it is the mysterious or mystical union of a man and woman - in imitation of Christ and the Church - in the presence of "the whole People of God" through her bishop or his presbyter. Divorce is likewise forbidden, but, as a concession to human weakness, it is allowed for adultery. Second and third marriages are permitted - not as a legal matter - out of mercy, a further concession to human weakness (e.g., after the death of a spouse). This Sacrament, as all Sacraments or Mysteries, is completed by the Eucharist, as St. Dionysius the Areopagite says.

As already mentioned, the Latins conceive Extreme Unction as the final Sacrament, the Sacrament which prepares the believer for death, purgatory and the Age to Come. In Orthodoxy, Holy Oil is received for healing. Often sickness is caused by sin; therefore, Holy Oil or Unction involved Confession of sins. At the end of the rite, the anointed receives Holy Communion.

The Orthodox Church also recognizes kingship, monasticism, blessings of the water, etc. as Mysteries.

Father Michael Azkoul

St. Catherine Mission, St. Louis, MO

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

Ok, but what makes the Catholic understanding defective? What in your grand opinion must change about the Catholic view of the Sacraments?

Did you read that article? And the differences between our understandings? THOSE are the problems they need to change.

Why? Is such uniformity necessary? The Church Fathers certainly never had such uniformity in their understanding of the sacraments, scripture, theology, etc.. Again, what makes their particular understanding defective rather than just different?
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #127 on: August 17, 2011, 08:04:39 PM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?
It's pointless. Zeal without knowledge comes to mind. Now as if Devin is gonna be the one asked to set the condition if such re-union were to happen. It's just another virtual reality game of his. He likes playing those.

Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".
Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #128 on: August 17, 2011, 08:11:53 PM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?
It's pointless. Zeal without knowledge comes to mind. Now as if Devin is gonna be the one asked to set the condition if such re-union were to happen. It's just another virtual reality game of his. He likes playing those.

Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".

This statement shows that you have much to learn...
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #129 on: August 17, 2011, 08:14:12 PM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?
It's pointless. Zeal without knowledge comes to mind. Now as if Devin is gonna be the one asked to set the condition if such re-union were to happen. It's just another virtual reality game of his. He likes playing those.

Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".

This statement shows that you have much to learn...

From who? You think I'm going to read Latin or Western sources on the issue? The only valid sources are Orthodox ones, or ones favorable to the Orthodox Church.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 08:16:18 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #130 on: August 17, 2011, 08:19:18 PM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?
It's pointless. Zeal without knowledge comes to mind. Now as if Devin is gonna be the one asked to set the condition if such re-union were to happen. It's just another virtual reality game of his. He likes playing those.

Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".

This statement shows that you have much to learn...

From who? You think I'm going to read Latin or Western sources on the issue? The only valid sources are Orthodox ones, or ones favorable to the Orthodox Church.

Until you can learn humility, what can those books teach you?
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #131 on: August 17, 2011, 08:27:49 PM »

I now predict that chances are high that on poster in this thread is gonna burn out within the next few years. That,s how the game ends, most of the time.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #132 on: August 17, 2011, 08:31:48 PM »

I now predict that chances are high that on poster in this thread is gonna burn out within the next few years. That,s how the game ends, most of the time.
Not really, I guarantee you that won't happen.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #133 on: August 17, 2011, 08:34:22 PM »

I now predict that chances are high that on poster in this thread is gonna burn out within the next few years. That,s how the game ends, most of the time.
Not really, I guarantee you that won't happen.
If that's not gonna happen, then it's gonna be because you'll mellow down.
Logged
Xenia1918
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Praying for Divine guidance
Posts: 569



« Reply #134 on: August 17, 2011, 08:40:46 PM »

Wait this looks like a Catholic NO Mass service?! What! No it is an Orthodox service!!!! Wow!!

No it most certainly doesn't, it is far more beautiful than the Novus Ordo.

Devin, there are some videos on youtube of the Novus Ordo Mass being celebrated ad orientem, in Latin, in Gregorian chant, with the use of incense, without altar girls or "extraordinary" lay ministers. I'll find some for you once I get home from work if you'd like.

Is it safe to assume your quarrel is with the abuse of the freedoms allowed to the Roman Church's priests under the Novus Ordo rubrics rather than with the Mass itself?

According to Pope St Pius V (Quo Primum), the Mass was never to be changed. Not only did the modernists in Rome change it, they changed the words of the Roman consecration, changing the very words of Christ Himself as well as the meaning, when they, in English, say "for you and for all" as opposed to "for you and for many'.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 08:41:53 PM by Xenia1918 » Logged

"O God, enlarge within us the sense of fellowship with all living things, our brothers the animals to whom Thou gavest the earth as their home in common with us..." (from the Prayer of St Basil the Great)

REAL RC: http://www.traditionalmass.org
REAL OC: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #135 on: August 17, 2011, 08:42:34 PM »

Wait this looks like a Catholic NO Mass service?! What! No it is an Orthodox service!!!! Wow!!

No it most certainly doesn't, it is far more beautiful than the Novus Ordo.

Devin, there are some videos on youtube of the Novus Ordo Mass being celebrated ad orientem, in Latin, in Gregorian chant, with the use of incense, without altar girls or "extraordinary" lay ministers. I'll find some for you once I get home from work if you'd like.

Is it safe to assume your quarrel is with the abuse of the freedoms allowed to the Roman Church's priests under the Novus Ordo rubrics rather than with the Mass itself?

According to Pope St Pius V (Quo Primum), the Mass was never to be changed. Not only did the modernists in Rome change it, they changed the words of the Roman consecration, changing the very words of Christ Himself as well as the meaning, when they, in English, say "for you and for all" as opposed to "for you and for many'.
Have you seen Orthodox liturgies like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAqsE334akY
Logged
Xenia1918
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Praying for Divine guidance
Posts: 569



« Reply #136 on: August 17, 2011, 08:48:32 PM »

Wait this looks like a Catholic NO Mass service?! What! No it is an Orthodox service!!!! Wow!!

No it most certainly doesn't, it is far more beautiful than the Novus Ordo.

Devin, there are some videos on youtube of the Novus Ordo Mass being celebrated ad orientem, in Latin, in Gregorian chant, with the use of incense, without altar girls or "extraordinary" lay ministers. I'll find some for you once I get home from work if you'd like.

Is it safe to assume your quarrel is with the abuse of the freedoms allowed to the Roman Church's priests under the Novus Ordo rubrics rather than with the Mass itself?

According to Pope St Pius V (Quo Primum), the Mass was never to be changed. Not only did the modernists in Rome change it, they changed the words of the Roman consecration, changing the very words of Christ Himself as well as the meaning, when they, in English, say "for you and for all" as opposed to "for you and for many'.
Have you seen Orthodox liturgies like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAqsE334akY


According to what someone posted on that video link, its the Coptic church....are they actually in communion with Orthodoxy? I don't know.

In my case, my issues are not really with the liturgical abuses carried out in modern Roman churches....because I don't believe the novus ordo is a valid liturgy anyway by historic RC doctrinal standards. So I don't really care what they do at a novus ordo, its heretical by traditional RC standards anyway, IMO. Now if they carried out those abuses in a Tridentine Mass, THEN I would have serious issues with it!
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 08:50:32 PM by Xenia1918 » Logged

"O God, enlarge within us the sense of fellowship with all living things, our brothers the animals to whom Thou gavest the earth as their home in common with us..." (from the Prayer of St Basil the Great)

REAL RC: http://www.traditionalmass.org
REAL OC: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #137 on: August 17, 2011, 08:49:42 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

There is far to much vitriolic pontificating and posturing on this thread, Lord have His Mercy!

What has been utterly lost is so ironic considering the OP mentioned that the legalistic interpretations of Roman Catholic tradition are part of what must be addressed to reconcile with Orthodox, which is not nearly as legalistic as the Catholics.  In fact, the legalistic approach of the Roman Catholic tradition over history I feel is directly what has contributed to the Western mindset within Protestantism of literalist interpretations of Sola Scripture and also why the Catholic Church has had to practically reform away all of its culture and tradition since 1960 in order to appease the reality that the Canons are always ideals which we centralize our prayerful effort towards as a Body of Christ, but this is also why have priests to help individualize the Canons and Tradition to specific and changing needs of the laity under their pastoral care.

So that being said, why are so many of us here in Orthodox reflecting such a legalistic approach to Orthodox on points on this thread? It is a blatant and unnecessary contradiction and also sometimes been rather mean spirited..

I pray for us all in this regard, but we need to continue to emphasize a spiritual, love based approach over a legalistic examination of the Canon and Tradition, either of Orthodox or Roman Catholic.

Stay Blessed,
Habte Selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #138 on: August 17, 2011, 08:50:35 PM »

..
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 08:52:18 PM by HabteSelassie » Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria, Lebanon & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic/Egyptian Orthodoxy
Posts: 5,041


Saint Severus of Antioch - the Eloquent Mouth

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #139 on: August 17, 2011, 08:52:35 PM »

I tried to compile some areas that we feel that the Roman Catholics need to change if union is ever to happen. This isn't a concrete list, nor is it comprehensive.

Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass
19.   Sitting during worship
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter

I got some of the list from:
http://saintpaulemmaus.org/files/het...---Outline.pdf
Which is a file that serves as an outline for a podcast series titled "Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy", it's specifically for the program that discusses Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism. (which is in two parts)
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/orthodox_and_roman_catholic_differences_-part_2

Also, some points come from:
http://books.google.com/books?id=RJoRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA87&dq=LXV.+Held+1450&hl=en&ei=OTMETdK6NpXqnQfa5-HlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=LXV.%20Held%201450&f=false
and can be seen at the very bottom of the page.

Lastly, more points are found here:
http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

I know that it seems that many of these points might seem minor, but they all contributed (and still contribute) to the division, and in fact, were denounced at many Orthodox Councils and by many Orthodox Saints.
None of this is going to happen.
Logged

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -Jesus Christ (Cf. St. John 16:33)
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #140 on: August 17, 2011, 09:08:13 PM »

As far as 9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter
is concerned, I thought that even in the early Church there was a divergence of views on how to determine the date of Easter. So doesn't that mean that there is no "Traditional method." 

Logged
LBK
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,143


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #141 on: August 17, 2011, 09:09:27 PM »

As far as 9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter
is concerned, I thought that even in the early Church there was a divergence of views on how to determine the date of Easter. So doesn't that mean that there is no "Traditional method." 

First Ecumenical Council.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,576


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #142 on: August 17, 2011, 09:41:11 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

There is far to much vitriolic pontificating and posturing on this thread, Lord have His Mercy!

What has been utterly lost is so ironic considering the OP mentioned that the legalistic interpretations of Roman Catholic tradition are part of what must be addressed to reconcile with Orthodox, which is not nearly as legalistic as the Catholics.  In fact, the legalistic approach of the Roman Catholic tradition over history I feel is directly what has contributed to the Western mindset within Protestantism of literalist interpretations of Sola Scripture and also why the Catholic Church has had to practically reform away all of its culture and tradition since 1960 in order to appease the reality that the Canons are always ideals which we centralize our prayerful effort towards as a Body of Christ, but this is also why have priests to help individualize the Canons and Tradition to specific and changing needs of the laity under their pastoral care.

So that being said, why are so many of us here in Orthodox reflecting such a legalistic approach to Orthodox on points on this thread? It is a blatant and unnecessary contradiction and also sometimes been rather mean spirited..

I pray for us all in this regard, but we need to continue to emphasize a spiritual, love based approach over a legalistic examination of the Canon and Tradition, either of Orthodox or Roman Catholic.

Stay Blessed,
Habte Selassie

Amen x3
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #143 on: August 17, 2011, 09:52:43 PM »

As far as 9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter
is concerned, I thought that even in the early Church there was a divergence of views on how to determine the date of Easter. So doesn't that mean that there is no "Traditional method." 

First Ecumenical Council.
Then how come Bede wrote: "The Sunday following the full Moon which falls on or after the equinox will give the lawful Easter." But the astronomical vernal equinox  can fall on March 19, 20, or 21, while the ecclesiastical date is fixed by convention on March 21, and may not be the correct date of the  astronomical vernal equinox.
Logged
JimCBrooklyn
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

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


Если бога нет, то все позволено


« Reply #144 on: August 17, 2011, 10:13:09 PM »

Most of these points seem crazy to get hung up on.
There are some big ones, the Pope, indulgences, yada, yada, yada, I think the cooler heads here know which ones those are without anyone having to break them all down, which make such a "reunion" seem highly unlikely, but some of these things would be absurd to hold on to in the face of a reunion, especially as many of them are mere matters of perception, that can't even be quantified.
Can we tell Rome, "be Orthodox!"? Sure (though they probably won't listen). But can we tell them, "also, be exactly like us in every possible way, and accept as God's truth every minute judgment we've made against you."? No.

RE: the communion/alcohol thing. That said, it's pretty clear that any alcoholic, even the "real" sort (and I have issues with this term...) is perfectly capable, on a physical level, of communing. Whether he wants to psyche himself out over it, every tiramisu, and every drop of Listerine along the way, or not, is his own problem.
The thing that at one point made this issue complicated to me, as a former member of 12-step groups, was the somewhat pervasive idea of a "physical allergy" to alcohol/drugs. I could not and do not accept that idea.

Finally, wonderful thoughts a few posts back, habteselassie, especially re:accusations of legalism, in light of the nature of this discussion...
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 10:30:47 PM by JimCBrooklyn » Logged

It is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers to every question, but to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not so much the object of our knowledge as the cause of our wonder.
-Metropolitan Kallistos Ware
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #145 on: August 17, 2011, 10:28:31 PM »

The thing that at one point made this issue complicated to me, as a former member of 12-step groups, was the somewhat pervasive idea of a "physical allergy" to alcohol/drugs. I could not and do not accept that idea.
Here is a testimony:  " Lese February 28, 2011 at 19:08
Hannah — I would love to hear what you end up learning on your own. I have been battling a very bad reaction to wine and champagne and possibly beer for over 20 years. One day I could drink and then one day I couldn’t. I also have some other food allergies — mostly to MSG, nitrates. I have been to the hospital more than once over these reactions. It’s very scary. My symptoms are like yours, but my blood pressure also goes up and my heart begins to race and pound. I had a reaction today from having a rice wine vinegar in a salad dressing and immediately drank tons and tons of water to slow down the reaction. That has worked for me a lot. I have had to use an Epipen before to stop a reaction, but I now don’t have insurance and so have no back-up plan when this occurs. I feel lost over the years getting answers. No allergist has a test for sulfites. I am not sure what is the exact culprit. I have had my allergist tell me I can have some alcohol, but I am honestly afraid to try, so I don’t drink. If you have any advice, please let me know. Thank you!"
http://www.allergy-details.com/wine-allergy/allergy-wine-worst-reactions/

Logged
JimCBrooklyn
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

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


Если бога нет, то все позволено


« Reply #146 on: August 17, 2011, 10:30:34 PM »

The thing that at one point made this issue complicated to me, as a former member of 12-step groups, was the somewhat pervasive idea of a "physical allergy" to alcohol/drugs. I could not and do not accept that idea.
Here is a testimony:  " Lese February 28, 2011 at 19:08
Hannah — I would love to hear what you end up learning on your own. I have been battling a very bad reaction to wine and champagne and possibly beer for over 20 years. One day I could drink and then one day I couldn’t. I also have some other food allergies — mostly to MSG, nitrates. I have been to the hospital more than once over these reactions. It’s very scary. My symptoms are like yours, but my blood pressure also goes up and my heart begins to race and pound. I had a reaction today from having a rice wine vinegar in a salad dressing and immediately drank tons and tons of water to slow down the reaction. That has worked for me a lot. I have had to use an Epipen before to stop a reaction, but I now don’t have insurance and so have no back-up plan when this occurs. I feel lost over the years getting answers. No allergist has a test for sulfites. I am not sure what is the exact culprit. I have had my allergist tell me I can have some alcohol, but I am honestly afraid to try, so I don’t drink. If you have any advice, please let me know. Thank you!"
http://www.allergy-details.com/wine-allergy/allergy-wine-worst-reactions/


I think you've misunderstood me. I don't doubt the existence, or possibility of actual allergy to alcohol, at all. What I doubt is that the "alcoholic" is inherent physically allergic to alcohol, which some folks and some literature in a 12-step setting will push the idea of.
Logged

It is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers to every question, but to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not so much the object of our knowledge as the cause of our wonder.
-Metropolitan Kallistos Ware
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #147 on: August 17, 2011, 10:34:43 PM »

The thing that at one point made this issue complicated to me, as a former member of 12-step groups, was the somewhat pervasive idea of a "physical allergy" to alcohol/drugs. I could not and do not accept that idea.
Here is a testimony:  " Lese February 28, 2011 at 19:08
Hannah — I would love to hear what you end up learning on your own. I have been battling a very bad reaction to wine and champagne and possibly beer for over 20 years. One day I could drink and then one day I couldn’t. I also have some other food allergies — mostly to MSG, nitrates. I have been to the hospital more than once over these reactions. It’s very scary. My symptoms are like yours, but my blood pressure also goes up and my heart begins to race and pound. I had a reaction today from having a rice wine vinegar in a salad dressing and immediately drank tons and tons of water to slow down the reaction. That has worked for me a lot. I have had to use an Epipen before to stop a reaction, but I now don’t have insurance and so have no back-up plan when this occurs. I feel lost over the years getting answers. No allergist has a test for sulfites. I am not sure what is the exact culprit. I have had my allergist tell me I can have some alcohol, but I am honestly afraid to try, so I don’t drink. If you have any advice, please let me know. Thank you!"
http://www.allergy-details.com/wine-allergy/allergy-wine-worst-reactions/


I think you've misunderstood me. I don't doubt the existence, or possibility of actual allergy to alcohol, at all. What I doubt is that the "alcoholic" is inherent physically allergic to alcohol, which some folks and some literature in a 12-step setting will push the idea of.
Oh, I see what you mean now.
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 #148 on: August 17, 2011, 11:11:39 PM »


Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".
You do know that acknowledging that you're smart, mature, etc. usually means that you just lost the game, right? And by the game, I mean life.
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
JimCBrooklyn
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

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


Если бога нет, то все позволено


« Reply #149 on: August 17, 2011, 11:29:29 PM »


Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".
You do know that acknowledging that you're smart, mature, etc. usually means that you just lost the game, right? And by the game, I mean life.
I thought you meant this:
http://www.losethegame.com/
Logged

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

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #150 on: August 17, 2011, 11:31:41 PM »

Good grief. Fortunately it is not up to 88Devin12 to bring about the reunion of our communions.

I rather like these thoughts of reunion put forth by SCOBA:

http://www.scoba.us/articles/towards-a-unified-church.html

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 #151 on: August 17, 2011, 11:48:57 PM »


Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".
You do know that acknowledging that you're smart, mature, etc. usually means that you just lost the game, right? And by the game, I mean life.
I thought you meant this:
http://www.losethegame.com/
Ugh, I just lost! I haven't lost the game in a year or so.
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
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,177


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #152 on: August 18, 2011, 02:09:17 AM »

Wait this looks like a Catholic NO Mass service?! What! No it is an Orthodox service!!!! Wow!!

No it most certainly doesn't, it is far more beautiful than the Novus Ordo.

Devin, there are some videos on youtube of the Novus Ordo Mass being celebrated ad orientem, in Latin, in Gregorian chant, with the use of incense, without altar girls or "extraordinary" lay ministers. I'll find some for you once I get home from work if you'd like.

Is it safe to assume your quarrel is with the abuse of the freedoms allowed to the Roman Church's priests under the Novus Ordo rubrics rather than with the Mass itself?

According to Pope St Pius V (Quo Primum), the Mass was never to be changed. Not only did the modernists in Rome change it, they changed the words of the Roman consecration, changing the very words of Christ Himself as well as the meaning, when they, in English, say "for you and for all" as opposed to "for you and for many'.
Have you seen Orthodox liturgies like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAqsE334akY


According to what someone posted on that video link, its the Coptic church....are they actually in communion with Orthodoxy? I don't know.

In my case, my issues are not really with the liturgical abuses carried out in modern Roman churches....because I don't believe the novus ordo is a valid liturgy anyway by historic RC doctrinal standards. So I don't really care what they do at a novus ordo, its heretical by traditional RC standards anyway, IMO. Now if they carried out those abuses in a Tridentine Mass, THEN I would have serious issues with it!

I agree with you.

The Novus Ordo is a Lutheran Liturgy taken almost verbatim from the 1904 Lutheran Hymnal.
It is not an ancient Roman Catholic Liturgy.
We should preach the truth in love and call it what it is.
The Novus Ordo is a Protestant Liturgy.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2011, 02:10:02 AM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 750



« Reply #153 on: August 18, 2011, 10:23:11 AM »

I never said freeze it. But there are certain boundaries which we must stay within. Western art and music are outside of those boundaries.

"Must stay within"?  Your so-called boundaries are way too narrow, even for Eastern Rite Orthodox.  Good thing you're not in charge.

You act like you are trying to justify the West. Guess what? They are in schism from the Holy Church and cannot be justified.

Not all of the West is in schism from the Orthodox Church.  You probably don't like the Western Rite, but it is a valid and canonical part of Orthodoxy.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #154 on: August 18, 2011, 10:41:11 AM »

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?

You might want to read this:

Quote
Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics recognize at least seven Sacraments or Mysteries: The Eucharist, Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Penance, Marriage and Holy Oil for the sick (which the Latins have traditionally called "Extreme Unction" and reserved for the dying).

Concerning the Sacraments in general, the Orthodox teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis). Roman Catholicism believes that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ."

At the same time, the Latins interpret the Sacraments in a legal and philosophical way. Hence, in the Eucharist, using the right material things (bread and wine) and pronouncing the correct formula, changes their substance (transubstantiation) into the Body and Blood of Christ. The visible elements or this and all Sacraments are merely "signs" of the presence of God.

The Orthodox call the Eucharist "the mystical Supper." What the priest and the faithful consume is mysteriously the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive Him under the forms of bread and wine, because it would be wholly repugnant to eat "real" human flesh and drink "real" human blood.

According to Roman Catholic teachings about the Sacraments (mystagogy), a person becomes a member of the Church through Baptism. "Original sin" is washed away. Orthodoxy teaches the same, but the idea of an "original sin" or "inherited guilt" (from Adam) has no part in her thinking. More will be said later on this matter.

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Sacrament of "Confirmation" and "Chrismation" both mean the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Latins delay "confirming" (with "first communion") baptized infants not more than seven years, that is, until the time they have some appreciation of the gift of God.

The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water, the "new Christian" rising from the water into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which leads to union with God. Such is the purpose of membership in the Church.

Ordination is the ceremony which, by the grace and calling of God, elevates a man to the priesthood. The sacerdotal priesthood has three orders: Bishop, presbyter (elder) and deacon. All Christians are priests by virtue of the baptism into Christ Who is priest, prophet and king - for which reason St. Peter refers to the Church as a "royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:9). The bishop is the "high priest," the "president of the Eucharist and all the Mysteries. Presbyters and deacons are his assistants. The Latins hold that the presbyter acts "in the person of Christ" when, in fact, he does no more than represent the bishop who is "the living icon of Christ."

Strictly speaking, Penance - sometimes called "Confession" - should only be received by the believer as a means of re-admission to the Church. For a long time, Penance, or confession of sins, prayer and fasting was employed only for those who had been expelled from the Church ("excommunication") or who had voluntarily departed (apostasy). The present practice is to receive Penance from a bishop or presbyter for some serious sin before receiving Holy Communion.

Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics consider Penance as a Sacrament. Each has different customs surrounding it, such as the confessional booth so common among the latter.

For Roman Catholics, Holy Matrimony is a binding, ostensibly an unbreakable, contract. The man and the woman marry each other with the "church" (bishop or priest) standing as a witness to it. Hence, no divorce under any conditions - no divorce but annulment of the marriage contract if some canonical defect in it may be found which renders it null and void (as if it never took place).

In Orthodoxy, Holy Matrimony is not a contract; it is the mysterious or mystical union of a man and woman - in imitation of Christ and the Church - in the presence of "the whole People of God" through her bishop or his presbyter. Divorce is likewise forbidden, but, as a concession to human weakness, it is allowed for adultery. Second and third marriages are permitted - not as a legal matter - out of mercy, a further concession to human weakness (e.g., after the death of a spouse). This Sacrament, as all Sacraments or Mysteries, is completed by the Eucharist, as St. Dionysius the Areopagite says.

As already mentioned, the Latins conceive Extreme Unction as the final Sacrament, the Sacrament which prepares the believer for death, purgatory and the Age to Come. In Orthodoxy, Holy Oil is received for healing. Often sickness is caused by sin; therefore, Holy Oil or Unction involved Confession of sins. At the end of the rite, the anointed receives Holy Communion.

The Orthodox Church also recognizes kingship, monasticism, blessings of the water, etc. as Mysteries.

Father Michael Azkoul

St. Catherine Mission, St. Louis, MO

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

Ok, but what makes the Catholic understanding defective? What in your grand opinion must change about the Catholic view of the Sacraments?

Did you read that article? And the differences between our understandings? THOSE are the problems they need to change.

Fr. Michael Azkoul has left the Orthodox Church. His rants against Saint Augustine and "the West" are good examples of what to avoid.
Logged

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

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #155 on: August 18, 2011, 11:02:29 AM »

The thing that at one point made this issue complicated to me, as a former member of 12-step groups, was the somewhat pervasive idea of a "physical allergy" to alcohol/drugs. I could not and do not accept that idea.
Here is a testimony:  " Lese February 28, 2011 at 19:08
Hannah — I would love to hear what you end up learning on your own. I have been battling a very bad reaction to wine and champagne and possibly beer for over 20 years. One day I could drink and then one day I couldn’t. I also have some other food allergies — mostly to MSG, nitrates. I have been to the hospital more than once over these reactions. It’s very scary. My symptoms are like yours, but my blood pressure also goes up and my heart begins to race and pound. I had a reaction today from having a rice wine vinegar in a salad dressing and immediately drank tons and tons of water to slow down the reaction. That has worked for me a lot. I have had to use an Epipen before to stop a reaction, but I now don’t have insurance and so have no back-up plan when this occurs. I feel lost over the years getting answers. No allergist has a test for sulfites. I am not sure what is the exact culprit. I have had my allergist tell me I can have some alcohol, but I am honestly afraid to try, so I don’t drink. If you have any advice, please let me know. Thank you!"
http://www.allergy-details.com/wine-allergy/allergy-wine-worst-reactions/


I think you've misunderstood me. I don't doubt the existence, or possibility of actual allergy to alcohol, at all. What I doubt is that the "alcoholic" is inherent physically allergic to alcohol, which some folks and some literature in a 12-step setting will push the idea of.

Stanley ain't reading well, he's been conflating the whole time.

The allergy or disease model in AA is just that a model to help its members try to understand something that is neither.

Again we are in agreement that no "real" alcoholic and by this I mean, if you ever were truly physically addicted to the point where death would happen likely if quitting without medical intervention, the most severe case (the scare quotes, being what they are) ain't going to go on a bender from Communion or all the other foods you listed.

The amount of alcohol in the Eucharist approaches stupidly small amounts relative to an ounce.

Most folks ain't going to even be able to drink an ounce of alcohol without being drunk or passing out.

As far as the rare case of an allergy to alcohol, which I have a hard time believing afflicts any significant portion of the population, it support the participation of everyone in one species.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
JimCBrooklyn
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

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


Если бога нет, то все позволено


« Reply #156 on: August 18, 2011, 11:19:29 AM »

The thing that at one point made this issue complicated to me, as a former member of 12-step groups, was the somewhat pervasive idea of a "physical allergy" to alcohol/drugs. I could not and do not accept that idea.
Here is a testimony:  " Lese February 28, 2011 at 19:08
Hannah — I would love to hear what you end up learning on your own. I have been battling a very bad reaction to wine and champagne and possibly beer for over 20 years. One day I could drink and then one day I couldn’t. I also have some other food allergies — mostly to MSG, nitrates. I have been to the hospital more than once over these reactions. It’s very scary. My symptoms are like yours, but my blood pressure also goes up and my heart begins to race and pound. I had a reaction today from having a rice wine vinegar in a salad dressing and immediately drank tons and tons of water to slow down the reaction. That has worked for me a lot. I have had to use an Epipen before to stop a reaction, but I now don’t have insurance and so have no back-up plan when this occurs. I feel lost over the years getting answers. No allergist has a test for sulfites. I am not sure what is the exact culprit. I have had my allergist tell me I can have some alcohol, but I am honestly afraid to try, so I don’t drink. If you have any advice, please let me know. Thank you!"
http://www.allergy-details.com/wine-allergy/allergy-wine-worst-reactions/


I think you've misunderstood me. I don't doubt the existence, or possibility of actual allergy to alcohol, at all. What I doubt is that the "alcoholic" is inherent physically allergic to alcohol, which some folks and some literature in a 12-step setting will push the idea of.

Stanley ain't reading well, he's been conflating the whole time.

The allergy or disease model in AA is just that a model to help its members try to understand something that is neither.

Again we are in agreement that no "real" alcoholic and by this I mean, if you ever were truly physically addicted to the point where death would happen likely if quitting without medical intervention, the most severe case (the scare quotes, being what they are) ain't going to go on a bender from Communion or all the other foods you listed.

The amount of alcohol in the Eucharist approaches stupidly small amounts relative to an ounce.

Most folks ain't going to even be able to drink an ounce of alcohol without being drunk or passing out.

As far as the rare case of an allergy to alcohol, which I have a hard time believing afflicts any significant portion of the population, it support the participation of everyone in one species.
Right. I just have known some folks who took Doc Silkworth quite literally (if you've ever run into BBSS people from New England, they're like evangelicals, just for AA. Anathema to anything, basically, that is not explicitly written in the first 164), and I once saw a girl berated by her sponsor for taking communion, and urged to change her sobriety date.

I know that this is not representative of AA-at-large at all. I have an overall positive view of AA (did lots to get me off the white and brown stuff), though I don't consider myself an alcoholic.

I just think it's a shame that there would be people denying themselves communion based on an idea that the second a drop of booze hits the lips, they'll wake up 8 days later in a gutter.
Logged

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

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,360



« Reply #157 on: August 18, 2011, 11:36:33 AM »

*Edited because I was being unfairly uncharitable to a certain group of people.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2011, 11:37:01 AM by Agabus » Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,360



« Reply #158 on: August 18, 2011, 11:37:57 AM »

Pews come from the Protestants, not from the Orthodox. They come from a misunderstanding of the services, and from a faulty theology. They have no place in Orthodox Churches.
There are pews in many Orthodox Churches in the USA. Why don't you first try to convince your Orthodox faithful that pews have no places in your Churches before attempting to require this rule on Roman Catholics who desire reunion with the Orthodox?
It's pointless. Zeal without knowledge comes to mind. Now as if Devin is gonna be the one asked to set the condition if such re-union were to happen. It's just another virtual reality game of his. He likes playing those.

Zeal without knowledge? LOL...
I wouldn't exactly call listening to many Orthodox podcasts, reading many Orthodox books and articles on the issue a "lack of knowledge".

This statement shows that you have much to learn...

From who? You think I'm going to read Latin or Western sources on the issue? The only valid sources are Orthodox ones, or ones favorable to the Orthodox Church.
Devin, I think the point they are trying to make is that reading smart books does not necessarily make one smart.

Wisdom. Let us attend.
Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,926



« Reply #159 on: August 18, 2011, 12:00:33 PM »

Not really my problem. Its not an issue of semantics, but how they are understood practically and theologically. Its not about whether to call them sacraments or mysteries.

And yet, beyond claiming that there are differences in understanding, you have not yet explained what those differences are. What are the differences, in your mind, between how the Catholics view their Sacraments and how the Orthodox view their Mysteries?

You might want to read this:

Quote
Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics recognize at least seven Sacraments or Mysteries: The Eucharist, Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Penance, Marriage and Holy Oil for the sick (which the Latins have traditionally called "Extreme Unction" and reserved for the dying).

Concerning the Sacraments in general, the Orthodox teach that their material elements (bread, wine, water, chrism, etc.) become grace-filled by the calling of the Holy Spirit (epiklesis). Roman Catholicism believes that the Sacraments are effective on account of the priest who acts "in the person of Christ."

At the same time, the Latins interpret the Sacraments in a legal and philosophical way. Hence, in the Eucharist, using the right material things (bread and wine) and pronouncing the correct formula, changes their substance (transubstantiation) into the Body and Blood of Christ. The visible elements or this and all Sacraments are merely "signs" of the presence of God.

The Orthodox call the Eucharist "the mystical Supper." What the priest and the faithful consume is mysteriously the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive Him under the forms of bread and wine, because it would be wholly repugnant to eat "real" human flesh and drink "real" human blood.

According to Roman Catholic teachings about the Sacraments (mystagogy), a person becomes a member of the Church through Baptism. "Original sin" is washed away. Orthodoxy teaches the same, but the idea of an "original sin" or "inherited guilt" (from Adam) has no part in her thinking. More will be said later on this matter.

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Sacrament of "Confirmation" and "Chrismation" both mean the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Latins delay "confirming" (with "first communion") baptized infants not more than seven years, that is, until the time they have some appreciation of the gift of God.

The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water, the "new Christian" rising from the water into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit which leads to union with God. Such is the purpose of membership in the Church.

Ordination is the ceremony which, by the grace and calling of God, elevates a man to the priesthood. The sacerdotal priesthood has three orders: Bishop, presbyter (elder) and deacon. All Christians are priests by virtue of the baptism into Christ Who is priest, prophet and king - for which reason St. Peter refers to the Church as a "royal priesthood" (I Pet. 2:9). The bishop is the "high priest," the "president of the Eucharist and all the Mysteries. Presbyters and deacons are his assistants. The Latins hold that the presbyter acts "in the person of Christ" when, in fact, he does no more than represent the bishop who is "the living icon of Christ."

Strictly speaking, Penance - sometimes called "Confession" - should only be received by the believer as a means of re-admission to the Church. For a long time, Penance, or confession of sins, prayer and fasting was employed only for those who had been expelled from the Church ("excommunication") or who had voluntarily departed (apostasy). The present practice is to receive Penance from a bishop or presbyter for some serious sin before receiving Holy Communion.

Both the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics consider Penance as a Sacrament. Each has different customs surrounding it, such as the confessional booth so common among the latter.

For Roman Catholics, Holy Matrimony is a binding, ostensibly an unbreakable, contract. The man and the woman marry each other with the "church" (bishop or priest) standing as a witness to it. Hence, no divorce under any conditions - no divorce but annulment of the marriage contract if some canonical defect in it may be found which renders it null and void (as if it never took place).

In Orthodoxy, Holy Matrimony is not a contract; it is the mysterious or mystical union of a man and woman - in imitation of Christ and the Church - in the presence of "the whole People of God" through her bishop or his presbyter. Divorce is likewise forbidden, but, as a concession to human weakness, it is allowed for adultery. Second and third marriages are permitted - not as a legal matter - out of mercy, a further concession to human weakness (e.g., after the death of a spouse). This Sacrament, as all Sacraments or Mysteries, is completed by the Eucharist, as St. Dionysius the Areopagite says.

As already mentioned, the Latins conceive Extreme Unction as the final Sacrament, the Sacrament which prepares the believer for death, purgatory and the Age to Come. In Orthodoxy, Holy Oil is received for healing. Often sickness is caused by sin; therefore, Holy Oil or Unction involved Confession of sins. At the end of the rite, the anointed receives Holy Communion.

The Orthodox Church also recognizes kingship, monasticism, blessings of the water, etc. as Mysteries.

Father Michael Azkoul

St. Catherine Mission, St. Louis, MO

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html

Ok, but what makes the Catholic understanding defective? What in your grand opinion must change about the Catholic view of the Sacraments?

Did you read that article? And the differences between our understandings? THOSE are the problems they need to change.

Fr. Michael Azkoul has left the Orthodox Church. His rants against Saint Augustine and "the West" are good examples of what to avoid.

So just because he left, everything he ever said should be tossed out? I'd hate to see what you'd have to say about Origen.

His points in that quotation are right on with Orthodoxy.
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #160 on: August 18, 2011, 12:10:26 PM »


Stanley ain't reading well, he's been conflating the whole time.

The allergy or disease model in AA is just that a model to help its members try to understand something that is neither.

Again we are in agreement that no "real" alcoholic and by this I mean, if you ever were truly physically addicted to the point where death would happen likely if quitting without medical intervention, the most severe case (the scare quotes, being what they are) ain't going to go on a bender from Communion or all the other foods you listed.

The amount of alcohol in the Eucharist approaches stupidly small amounts relative to an ounce.

Most folks ain't going to even be able to drink an ounce of alcohol without being drunk or passing out.

As far as the rare case of an allergy to alcohol, which I have a hard time believing afflicts any significant portion of the population, it support the participation of everyone in one species.
Right. I just have known some folks who took Doc Silkworth quite literally (if you've ever run into BBSS people from New England, they're like evangelicals, just for AA. Anathema to anything, basically, that is not explicitly written in the first 164), and I once saw a girl berated by her sponsor for taking communion, and urged to change her sobriety date.

I know that this is not representative of AA-at-large at all. I have an overall positive view of AA (did lots to get me off the white and brown stuff), though I don't consider myself an alcoholic.

I just think it's a shame that there would be people denying themselves communion based on an idea that the second a drop of booze hits the lips, they'll wake up 8 days later in a gutter.

That first 164 BS is everywhere especially in meetings where "Cleveland" founded. I can walk into just about any room and tell you after a meeting if it was "founded" within the New York, Akron, or Cleveland tradition.

I could say a lot more on the subject for better and worse, but we will leave it at that.

Best AA is usually in small places where folks know each other well.

Thank God for my first sponsor and second. And Dr. Bob. And Bill W., I love a loon. //:=)

/alkie talkie

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
AWR
Greetings from the Southern Jersey Shore.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 240


Expelled from Paradise


WWW
« Reply #161 on: August 18, 2011, 02:32:57 PM »

The list can’t just be one sided.  To reunite, the east must return to considering the bishop of Rome as the first among equals.  That in itself brings a list of what it would take for the east to see him in that light.

1.   First of all, the Orthodox would insist that the bishop of Rome hold the orthodox faith of the catholic church, and teach and defend true Christian doctrine.
2.   In order for the Pope of Rome to exercise presidency among the churches and Christian leadership in the world, his church would also have to exemplify proper Christian worship.
3.   And finally, structural and administrative changes must occur if the Pope of Rome will be accepted and recognized as the bishop who exercises presidency among the churches and serves as Christianity's world leader.


Fr. Thomas Hopko has a list of about twenty or so items that he thinks it will take listed here:
 
        http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php

His list for the east is simply:
Quote
The Orthodox churches would surely have to undergo many humbling changes in attitude, structure and behavior to be in sacramental communion with the Roman church and to recognize its presidency among the churches in the person of its pope. The Orthodox would certainly have to overcome their own inner struggles over ecclesiastical power and privilege. They would have to candidly admit their sinful contributions to Christian division and disunity, and to repent of them sincerely. They would also have to forego all desires or demands for other churches to repent publicly of their past errors and sins, being willing to allow God to consign everything of the past to oblivion for the sake of bringing about the reconciliation and reunion of Christians at the present time.

In a word, the Orthodox would have to sacrifice everything, excepting only the faith itself, for the sake of building a common future together with Christians who are willing and able to do so with them. Like Roman Catholics and Protestants, they would have to be willing to die with Christ to themselves and their personal, cultural and ecclesiastical interests for the sake of being in full unity with all who desire to be saved by the crucified Lord in the one holy church "which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all" (Eph 1.23), that is "the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth." (1Tim 315)
Logged
JimCBrooklyn
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

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


Если бога нет, то все позволено


« Reply #162 on: August 18, 2011, 02:34:20 PM »

The list can’t just be one sided.  To reunite, the east must return to considering the bishop of Rome as the first among equals.  That in itself brings a list of what it would take for the east to see him in that light.

1.   First of all, the Orthodox would insist that the bishop of Rome hold the orthodox faith of the catholic church, and teach and defend true Christian doctrine.
2.   In order for the Pope of Rome to exercise presidency among the churches and Christian leadership in the world, his church would also have to exemplify proper Christian worship.
3.   And finally, structural and administrative changes must occur if the Pope of Rome will be accepted and recognized as the bishop who exercises presidency among the churches and serves as Christianity's world leader.


Fr. Thomas Hopko has a list of about twenty or so items that he thinks it will take listed here:
 
        http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php

His list for the east is simply:
Quote
The Orthodox churches would surely have to undergo many humbling changes in attitude, structure and behavior to be in sacramental communion with the Roman church and to recognize its presidency among the churches in the person of its pope. The Orthodox would certainly have to overcome their own inner struggles over ecclesiastical power and privilege. They would have to candidly admit their sinful contributions to Christian division and disunity, and to repent of them sincerely. They would also have to forego all desires or demands for other churches to repent publicly of their past errors and sins, being willing to allow God to consign everything of the past to oblivion for the sake of bringing about the reconciliation and reunion of Christians at the present time.

In a word, the Orthodox would have to sacrifice everything, excepting only the faith itself, for the sake of building a common future together with Christians who are willing and able to do so with them. Like Roman Catholics and Protestants, they would have to be willing to die with Christ to themselves and their personal, cultural and ecclesiastical interests for the sake of being in full unity with all who desire to be saved by the crucified Lord in the one holy church "which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all" (Eph 1.23), that is "the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth." (1Tim 315)

Laser show.
Logged

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

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #163 on: August 18, 2011, 02:53:38 PM »

I now predict that chances are high that on poster in this thread is gonna burn out within the next few years. That,s how the game ends, most of the time.
Not really, I guarantee you that won't happen.

Some Jew or something once said something about our plans giving God a chance to a play a joke on us or something.
Logged

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

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #164 on: August 18, 2011, 02:56:18 PM »

His list for the east is simply:
Quote
The Orthodox churches would surely have to undergo many humbling changes in attitude, structure and behavior to be in sacramental communion with the Roman church and to recognize its presidency among the churches in the person of its pope. The Orthodox would certainly have to overcome their own inner struggles over ecclesiastical power and privilege. They would have to candidly admit their sinful contributions to Christian division and disunity, and to repent of them sincerely. They would also have to forego all desires or demands for other churches to repent publicly of their past errors and sins, being willing to allow God to consign everything of the past to oblivion for the sake of bringing about the reconciliation and reunion of Christians at the present time.

In a word, the Orthodox would have to sacrifice everything, excepting only the faith itself, for the sake of building a common future together with Christians who are willing and able to do so with them. Like Roman Catholics and Protestants, they would have to be willing to die with Christ to themselves and their personal, cultural and ecclesiastical interests for the sake of being in full unity with all who desire to be saved by the crucified Lord in the one holy church "which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all" (Eph 1.23), that is "the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth." (1Tim 315)


Get a few hours of Fr. Thom speaking. Every time he quotes this verse, drink. One helluva game.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
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 #165 on: August 18, 2011, 03:26:03 PM »

Now for my annoying point-by-point commentary! Grin

Quote
Repudiate/Reject:
1.   Papal Universal Jurisdiction
2.   Papal Infallibility
3.   Papal Petrine exclusivism (i.e., that only the Pope is Peter’s successor)
4.   Development of Doctrine (as seen by the West)
5.   The Filioque
6.   Original Sin understood as guilt transmitted via “propagation” (I’m told the RCC no longer believes this)
7.   The Immaculate Conception of Mary
8.   Divine Simplicity
9.   Merit and Satisfaction soteriology
10.   Purgatory and Indulgences
11.   Created grace (vs. uncreated)

With some qualifications, I agree with all of these.

Quote
12.   Painting of religious imagery contrary to the traditional forms. (For veneration and ecclesiastical use)

One this one, I'm going to depart. I actually like the artistic style of so-called "Western iconography." There are many beautiful icons of saints and events in this style. I do find Byzantine/Eastern icons far deeper theologically, the lack of realism allowing much more to be portrayed. The most common example I've seen is the Nativity of our Lord icon, in which Christ is often depicted in swaddling clothes much like grave clothes, and in a tomb recessed in a cave. This depiction cannot occur as such in Western style. Similarly, the depiction of Christ as a "little adult" in Eastern iconography, which is deep and beautiful theologically, cannot be done in the Western style.

Still, I don't see the theological "problems" with western iconography. I find it quite beautiful.


Quote
13.   Gregorian Reforms, Vatican I, Vatican II, and almost every Post-Schism Council
14.   Adoption of secular/heterodox music into liturgical worship.

Yes, although I would like to wade through the Reforms and Councils of #13 to hammer out those details.

Quote
15.   Mandatory clerical celibacy
16.   Use of Unleavened Bread
17.   Self-Flagellation/Mortification of the Flesh

Ultimately, I accept these. Clerical calibacy is a perfectly legitmate local tradition. I prefer having a married priest, myself, but if the Bishop of Rome opts to enforce clerical celibacy, I see nothing wrong with it.

Quote
18.   Allowing Priests/Bishops who have fallen into fornication to celebrate Liturgy/Mass

Agreed. Defrock/depose.

Quote
19.   Sitting during worship

Not a theological issue. I'm quite thoroughly a "traditional" (I think so anyway) Eastern Christian, and don't like pews. However, if the Roman church uses them, that's their right, even if I don't like it. I much prefer standing and think it would be better in general (and Orthodox churches with pews bug me!) but it doesn't make them heterodox.

Quote
20.   Punishment of heretics by temporal/physical means

We have both done this, and both defended it (some still do).

Quote
21.   Legalistic theology
22.   Faith built on science/reason
23.   Satisfaction theory of atonement
24.   Transubstantiation as dogma

I agree. #21 needs to be expounded, though. When I say this, I'm speaking of the system in the RCC that enforces the idea of a breach of legal contract with God, and that confession is needed to "clean the slate." Being a good Christian is often made into being a good lawyer and doing the right things. We see this is many of the devotions of the RCC as well (the promises of the rosary, scapulars, etc.) as well as in indulgences. This is not Orthodox.


Quote
25.   Sacraments (vs. Mysteries)

The only issue I take with the RCC view of Sacraments is that they limit them to seven. I much prefer the "sacramental life" approach of the East that sets no official list and sees a mystery as any point at which God enters our lives and how we should live for such communion with God through the Church.

Quote
26.   Assumption of Mary (vs. Dormition)
27.   Kneeling/Prostrating on Sundays

Thankfully, the RCC no longer teaches the Assumption of Mary prior to her Dormition. However, they should disallow this thought as a "pious opinion." The Theotokos did die, and is important to our Tradition. The RCC should make this clear.

As for #27, these are local customs. While I prefer not kneeling/prostrating on Sunday (save at the epiclesis, in some places) it's not a roadblock to communion (and just a bothersome to me is the lack of kneeling/prostrating in many Orthodox churches for weekday services!)

Quote
28.   Thomism and St. Augustine’s errors.

I would like to further expound on what these errors are, but I do believe there to be problems with Thomism and Augustinianism.


Quote
Accept/Restore:
1.   The authority of Ecumenical Councils over the Pope
2.   The Essence/Energies distinction
3.   Reconnect Confirmation/Chrismation back to Baptism rather than delaying it
4.   Administer Holy Communion (both body & blood) to all Church members, including infants
5.   Pre-Tridentine and Tridentine form(s) of Liturgy/Mass
6.   Praying to the liturgical East

Yes. With disagreement about the allergy discussion above. There are instances where this is a legitimate concern, and have been evidenced by previous posters in this thread. However, I also admire the faith of those like St. John the Wonderworker who partook of Eucharist spat out by the woman infected with rabes. May we all have such faith.

Quote
7.   Traditional fasting, including Wed/Fri fasts and all fasting periods

Yes. Although I would note that the West has an ancient and venerable fasting tradition that is separate from the Eastern. The traditional western fasting is what should be restored. By no means should the RCC be required to utilize Eastern fasting guidelines, to which they were never subjected.


Quote
8.   Canons as guide rather than law (related to 22)

Yes.

Quote
9.   Traditional method of dating Pascha/Easter


Maybe? This was an ancient problem that was finally resolved at Nicaea. However, with the current calendar problem, I wouldn't make a fuss about this. Although it is my hope that the whole Church would celebrate the feasts together (and most especially Pascha).



But that's just my two cents, FWIW.
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
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 #166 on: August 18, 2011, 03:30:24 PM »

And to answer AWR above, the Pope of Rome should rightfully be restored as first-among-equals if he were to re-unite with the Church. In this case, in order simply to re-unite, he should have already proven himself all of the things which that list requires. Therefore, upon the reception of the Roman church back into Communion, he should be considered the Ecumenical Patriarch of Rome, the first-among-equals of the Catholic Church.
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
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,022


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #167 on: August 18, 2011, 03:36:08 PM »

I can agree with pretty much the whole list. However, I noticed one thing wasn't covered: do the archbishops and cardinals get to keep their cool hats?  Huh
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #168 on: August 18, 2011, 03:48:27 PM »

I thought the Immaculate Conception was an acceptable theologoumenon in Eastern Orthodoxy, or in the OP did you just mean that the fact it is a dogma in the Latin Church is a problem?