Liturgical rites and the Pope

[ialmisry]

It would have happened again in Scandinavia with the Nordic Catholic Church, if not for the myopia of the local Greek hierarch, who doesn't even favor Scandinavians becoming EO.  Too bad they did not approach Moscow (whose jurisdiction stretches into northern Norway).

You really think that it would have turned out as a new unified local church? Despite the myriad of EO churches in Scandinavia?

Yes, less Greek influence, more Russian influence.

Has the Scandinavian Greek bishops even bothered yet with setting up their Episcopal Assembly?

[Peter J]

It would have happened again in Scandinavia with the Nordic Catholic Church, if not for the myopia of the local Greek hierarch, who doesn't even favor Scandinavians becoming EO.

Can't say whether it would have or not, but in any case I guess your loss is others' gain.

Likely a gain for atheism.

Fortunately not entirely: the PNC took them under their wing.

In terms of low opinions of non-Orthodox, you've really outdone yourselves. I see little similarity between the PNCC and atheism.

Neither do I.

Cavaradossi called it "a gain for atheism" to which you replied "not entirely". So it would seems that you have a slightly higher opinion of the PNCC.

[ialmisry]

It would have happened again in Scandinavia with the Nordic Catholic Church, if not for the myopia of the local Greek hierarch, who doesn't even favor Scandinavians becoming EO.

Can't say whether it would have or not, but in any case I guess your loss is others' gain.

Likely a gain for atheism.

Fortunately not entirely: the PNC took them under their wing.

In terms of low opinions of non-Orthodox, you've really outdone yourselves. I see little similarity between the PNCC and atheism.

Neither do I.

Cavaradossi called it "a gain for atheism" to which you replied "not entirely". So it would seems that you have a slightly higher opinion of the PNCC.

No, the PNCC did not get them all, so for all we know they are moorless and easy pickin's in irreligious Scandinavia.

[Cavaradossi]

It would have happened again in Scandinavia with the Nordic Catholic Church, if not for the myopia of the local Greek hierarch, who doesn't even favor Scandinavians becoming EO.

Can't say whether it would have or not, but in any case I guess your loss is others' gain.

Likely a gain for atheism.

Fortunately not entirely: the PNC took them under their wing.

In terms of low opinions of non-Orthodox, you've really outdone yourselves. I see little similarity between the PNCC and atheism.

Neither do I.

Cavaradossi called it "a gain for atheism" to which you replied "not entirely". So it would seems that you have a slightly higher opinion of the PNCC.

Sorry, I was being unclear. That was just a comment on how widespread atheism has become in Scandinavia, and how the 'myopia' of some could lead others to become disillusioned with religion in general. I don't equate any of those groups with atheism. It seems that Isa understood what I was going for, hence his response that the PNCC fortunately took them in.

I'm not quite ready to buy into St. Athanasius' polemical argument that a baptism into Arianism (or any other heresy/schism for that matter) is a baptism into atheism.

[Peter J]

It would have happened again in Scandinavia with the Nordic Catholic Church, if not for the myopia of the local Greek hierarch, who doesn't even favor Scandinavians becoming EO.

Can't say whether it would have or not, but in any case I guess your loss is others' gain.

Likely a gain for atheism.

Fortunately not entirely: the PNC took them under their wing.

In terms of low opinions of non-Orthodox, you've really outdone yourselves. I see little similarity between the PNCC and atheism.

Neither do I.

Cavaradossi called it "a gain for atheism" to which you replied "not entirely". So it would seems that you have a slightly higher opinion of the PNCC.

No, the PNCC did not get them all, so for all we know they are moorless and easy pickin's in irreligious Scandinavia.

OIC. That's different from what you said the first time.

[Deacon Lance]

The Maronites were very much Monothelites:all the contemporary sources, Orthodox (both Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian), Ultramontanist, Muslim and Maronite are quite agreed on that.  They didn't really get weaned off of it until the pseudo-council of Florence, and even then, not completely until the council of 1736.

Yes contemporary Antiochians (Orthodox and Catholic) and Latins with an axe to grind. It is wrong to call miaphysites monophysites.  It is wrong to call miathelites monothelites.  Theodosius of Ceasarea's reply to St Maximos the Confessor is a representative statement of what the Maronites taught:

"We too acknowledge the natures and different operations, namely divine and human, and that his Godhead is endowed with will and his manhood endowed with will, since his soul was not without a will. But we do not say two, lest we present him as being at war with himself" (Disputation at Bizye, CCSG 39, p. 109, 387-92).

[Deacon Lance]

The heretical Pope Honorius had been deposed and anathematized by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (681).

Honorius died in 638 in communion with the Church, he was never deposed.  His anathematization in 681 was posthumous like that of Theodore of Mopsuestia.   

[Deacon Lance]

When said Church follows his disobedience, it becomes a schismatic church.

Not all the Church followed.

Your Vatican thinks so...another "church" of France.

Only the bishops of the SSPX were excommunicated and those have been lifted.  Rome has made succesive accomodations to those who prefer the Tridentine form of the Roman Rite.  On the otherhand, those of the Orthodox Church of France who refused to follow Bishop Germain were forced to adopt the Byzantine Rite.

[ialmisry]

The Maronites were very much Monothelites:all the contemporary sources, Orthodox (both Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian), Ultramontanist, Muslim and Maronite are quite agreed on that.  They didn't really get weaned off of it until the pseudo-council of Florence, and even then, not completely until the council of 1736.

Yes contemporary Antiochians (Orthodox and Catholic) and Latins with an axe to grind.

and Maronites too, like the Maronite manuscript that records the Life of St. Maximos the Confessor, only the Maronite has entitled it "The  Life of the wretched Maximus, whose tongue was cut out and his hand cut off for his blasphemy" or some such thing (I'm going by memory, I don't have the copy at hand but it is mentioned here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=Xa1zdxyfxLYC&pg=PA63&dq=Early+Syriac+Life+of+Maximus+maronite+manuscript&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7iF9T8vAJZKi8gS75uztDA&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Early%20Syriac%20Life%20of%20Maximus%20maronite%20manuscript&f=false
An introduction to Syriac studies By Sebastian P. Brock

More commical is the Maronites doctoring of their own old manuscripts, but not very well.  Like the copy of "Pat." John Maron's Exposition of the Faith, where the Syriac is changed to exonerate him of Monotheletism, but failed to make the changes in the Garshuni (Arabic written in Syriac letters).
http://books.google.com/books?id=8Ogp94y8CJgC&pg=PA160&dq=%22failed+to+make+the+same+changes+in+the+Arabic%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fjd9T-HxPIO69QTKs5iIAQ&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22failed%20to%20make%20the%20same%20changes%20in%20the%20Arabic%22&f=false

Just because the Latins couldn't distinguish us WOGS, doesn't mean we couldn't.  Before 820, Theodore Abu Qurrah writes against the Maronites and reproaches them as anathematized by the Sixth Council.  The next century Pope Eutychios of Alexandria identifies EP Sergius of Constantinople, Pope Cyrus of Alexandria, Emperor Heraclius etc. as "Maronites."  Both writers, btw, were in communion with Rome, and Theodore points out the Maronites are not (I don't recall if Eutychios talks about that).  Pat. John of Antioch (the one your Crusader friends expelled from his see) writes of the Monothelite Maronites, etc.

It is wrong to call miaphysites monophysites.  It is wrong to call miathelites monothelites.

I did neither, regardless of how right or wrong that would be.

Theodosius of Ceasarea's reply to St Maximos the Confessor is a representative statement of what the Maronites taught:

"We too acknowledge the natures and different operations, namely divine and human, and that his Godhead is endowed with will and his manhood endowed with will, since his soul was not without a will. But we do not say two, lest we present him as being at war with himself" (Disputation at Bizye, CCSG 39, p. 109, 387-92).

That he is disputing with St. Maximos the Confessor should have tipped you off to the monotheletism.  Btw, Theodosius was monothelite, but he was not Maronite.

[Michał Kalina]

Has the Scandinavian Greek bishops even bothered yet with setting up their Episcopal Assembly?

Never heard of any.

[ialmisry]

The heretical Pope Honorius had been deposed and anathematized by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (681).

Honorius died in 638 in communion with the Church, he was never deposed.  His anathematization in 681 was posthumous like that of Theodore of Mopsuestia.   

And your point?  Have you lifted the excommunications placed by the Fathers in Ecumenical Council?  Undone all the anathemas on Pope Honorius uttered by every pope of Rome taking office for centuries after him?

[ialmisry]

Has the Scandinavian Greek bishops even bothered yet with setting up their Episcopal Assembly?

Never heard of any.

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath, though Met. Stylianos finally convened one (and helped himself to East Asia in the process).

[Deacon Lance]

The heretical Pope Honorius had been deposed and anathematized by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (681).

Honorius died in 638 in communion with the Church, he was never deposed.  His anathematization in 681 was posthumous like that of Theodore of Mopsuestia.   

And your point?  Have you lifted the excommunications placed by the Fathers in Ecumenical Council?  Undone all the anathemas on Pope Honorius uttered by every pope of Rome taking office for centuries after him?

He wasn't deposed as you stated in error.  You can't excommunicate someone who is dead and posthumous anathemas of persons are silly, they have gone to their reward.  If you want to declare a teaching in error fine, leave the dead to God's mercy. 

[Deacon Lance]

It is wrong to call miaphysites monophysites.  It is wrong to call miathelites monothelites.

I did neither, regardless of how right or wrong that would be.

You do it every time you call Maronites monothelites.

Theodosius of Ceasarea's reply to St Maximos the Confessor is a representative statement of what the Maronites taught:

"We too acknowledge the natures and different operations, namely divine and human, and that his Godhead is endowed with will and his manhood endowed with will, since his soul was not without a will. But we do not say two, lest we present him as being at war with himself" (Disputation at Bizye, CCSG 39, p. 109, 387-92).

That he is disputing with St. Maximos the Confessor should have tipped you off to the monotheletism.  Btw, Theodosius was monothelite, but he was not Maronite.

He was a Greek and a miathelite.  

[Altar Server]

Christos Anesti!
Those pictures of Archbishop Sheen are amazing thank you!

[ialmisry]

The heretical Pope Honorius had been deposed and anathematized by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (681).

Honorius died in 638 in communion with the Church, he was never deposed.  His anathematization in 681 was posthumous like that of Theodore of Mopsuestia.   

And your point?  Have you lifted the excommunications placed by the Fathers in Ecumenical Council?  Undone all the anathemas on Pope Honorius uttered by every pope of Rome taking office for centuries after him?

He wasn't deposed as you stated in error.  You can't excommunicate someone who is dead and posthumous anathemas of persons are silly, they have gone to their reward.  If you want to declare a teaching in error fine, leave the dead to God's mercy. 

"What you bind on earth will be bound in heaven."

I'll stick with what the Church through the Fathers decided, as it seemed good to them and the Holy Spirit.

[ialmisry]

It is wrong to call miaphysites monophysites.  It is wrong to call miathelites monothelites.

I did neither, regardless of how right or wrong that would be.

You do it every time you call Maronites monothelites.

Theodosius of Ceasarea's reply to St Maximos the Confessor is a representative statement of what the Maronites taught:

"We too acknowledge the natures and different operations, namely divine and human, and that his Godhead is endowed with will and his manhood endowed with will, since his soul was not without a will. But we do not say two, lest we present him as being at war with himself" (Disputation at Bizye, CCSG 39, p. 109, 387-92).

That he is disputing with St. Maximos the Confessor should have tipped you off to the monotheletism.  Btw, Theodosius was monothelite, but he was not Maronite.

He was a Greek and a miathelite.  

Miathelitism?  Never heard of it.  A new creation?

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Catholic Discussion (Moderator: username!) > Topic: Liturgical rites and the Pope