OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 21, 2014, 08:14:33 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: Official stance of the RCC on orthodoxy  (Read 7008 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
TruthSeeker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


OC.net


« on: November 19, 2005, 01:54:10 AM »

What position does the Roman Catholic church take against orthodoxy? Do they think the orthodox are heretics as they think protestants are? I am talking about the official church stance and not the stance taken by individuals within the church.

Logged

NULL
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2005, 02:41:17 AM »

The Vatican officially says the Orthodox are not heretical but guilty only of schism by not accepting Rome's jurisdiction over the Orthodox.  Rome also views all of our sacraments / mysteries to be valid / grace-filled. 

That is the current Vatican position - the shifting historical attitudes are not so simple... nor do the Orthodox reciprocate Vatican views always. 
Logged
TruthSeeker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


OC.net


« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2005, 02:49:38 AM »

The Vatican officially says the Orthodox are not heretical but guilty only of schism by not accepting Rome's jurisdiction over the Orthodox.  Rome also views all of our sacraments / mysteries to be valid / grace-filled. 

That is the current Vatican position - the shifting historical attitudes are not so simple... nor do the Orthodox reciprocate Vatican views always. 


Thank you for the good reply

Can a Roman Catholic take communion in an orthodox church...and visa versa?

Logged

NULL
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 29,483



« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2005, 03:01:31 AM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
Logged

I would strongly recommend Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by Fr Seraphim Rose.
Seafra
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: British Orthodox hopeful
Posts: 230


It's in the shelter of each other that people live

Mr.Dougherty
WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2012, 01:49:08 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?
Logged
Jonathan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 798


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2012, 01:56:03 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy. Early on, many Orthodox were advised to receive Communion in an Anglican Church, which was willing to extend sacramental hospitality without the strings attached by Catholicism... but this is clearly no longer an option, and it is questionable whether it was the correct decision at the time...

If we are legitimately unable to attend Church, we trust in God to provide for us. We pray at home. We use what is available to us. It is entirely different than choosing not to go to Church and receive Communion. Some can only commute long distance infrequently to commune, and otherwise must pray in the home.
Logged
Seafra
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: British Orthodox hopeful
Posts: 230


It's in the shelter of each other that people live

Mr.Dougherty
WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 08, 2012, 01:59:07 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy. Early on, many Orthodox were advised to receive Communion in an Anglican Church, which was willing to extend sacramental hospitality without the strings attached by Catholicism... but this is clearly no longer an option, and it is questionable whether it was the correct decision at the time...

If we are legitimately unable to attend Church, we trust in God to provide for us. We pray at home. We use what is available to us. It is entirely different than choosing not to go to Church and receive Communion. Some can only commute long distance infrequently to commune, and otherwise must pray in the home.
Ah I see thanks for that! i was unaware Rome made such consequences...
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,975


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 08, 2012, 02:55:57 PM »

According to the last Roman Catholic missal I had, a few years ago, they give Communion to Orthodox who wish to come forward.
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/
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 08, 2012, 06:38:03 PM »

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy.

I think you are wrong. I was told many times that we are those who consider Communion as a proclamation of the Creed.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #9 on: January 08, 2012, 06:42:59 PM »

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy.

I think you are wrong. I was told many times that we are those who consider Communion as a proclamation of the Creed.

there are alot of churches who proclaim the creed though. That doesn't mean we are in communion with them.
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #10 on: January 08, 2012, 06:43:42 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).

Can an Orthodox be communed by an RC priest on their death bed if there is no EO one available?
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 29,483



« Reply #11 on: January 08, 2012, 06:46:33 PM »

I don't know. I guess some would say yes, certainly. Others no. If you don't think they have grace, then there'd be no point. If you think they do, are or unsure, then I suppose it'd be different.  Sorry for not giving a straight answer, I just don't think there is one agreed upon...
Logged

I would strongly recommend Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by Fr Seraphim Rose.
Irish Melkite
Information Mongeror
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite Greek-Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Newton
Posts: 967


WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 08, 2012, 07:23:08 PM »

Back in the early years of the 21st century, Catholic parishes began to publish in their Sunday bulletins and such that the Catholic Church allowed the faithful of the other Apostolic Churches - the EO, OO, ACOE, and PNCC - to receive the Mysteries of Communion and Penance if they were properly disposed and requested to do so. (Technically, the provision of Canon Law says something to the effect that it is allowed when those of the other Churches are impeded from approaching the clergy of their own Church or something similar, but it was interpreted rather broadly.)

Shortly thereafter, the bulletin text was reworked to where it now says something to the effect that, while the Catholic Church permits this, it encourages those of the other Apostolic Churches to conform to the instructions of their own hierarchs in deciding whether or not they may do so - and for most Orthodox Christians that would preclude them from doing so.

That the practice is not outright rejected by Rome on the basis of the Orthodox rejection of it is probably because of the fact that there are formal and informal pastoral agreements between Rome and a few OO and other Churches that provide for the faithful of each such to receive pastoral care and, particularly, those Mysteries in the counterpart Churches if their own clergy are not available. Such formal agreements exist between: Rome and the ACOE and the Chaldean Catholic Churches; and, between Rome and the Syriac Orthodox and Catholic Churches. There is also a long-standing informal agreement that applies to the Armenian Catholic and Apostolic Churches. At one time, there was a similar informal agreement between Rome and the Coptic Orthodox and Catholic Churches, but that is no longer the case. Few of these pastoral care provisions are ever invoked these days because most of the Churches, Catholic and otherwise, are now adequately represented in the diaspora (which is where they were most commonly invoked) - that wasn't always true.

As well, in the Middle East, because of intermarriage, persecution, etc, there are instances in which intercommunion occurs among Catholic and Orthodox communities.

Many years,

Neil
Logged

"Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin Rite to manifest one's Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church."

- Melkite Archbishop Joseph (Tawil), of blessed memory
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #13 on: January 09, 2012, 12:48:57 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy. Early on, many Orthodox were advised to receive Communion in an Anglican Church, which was willing to extend sacramental hospitality without the strings attached by Catholicism... but this is clearly no longer an option, and it is questionable whether it was the correct decision at the time...

If we are legitimately unable to attend Church, we trust in God to provide for us. We pray at home. We use what is available to us. It is entirely different than choosing not to go to Church and receive Communion. Some can only commute long distance infrequently to commune, and otherwise must pray in the home.
Ah I see thanks for that! i was unaware Rome made such consequences...

In reality there are no strings attached from the Catholic point of view.  Not sure where that idea comes from but the openness of Catholic sacraments to Orthodox believers is not some attempt to "make" Orthodox believers papists.  It is in recognition that the Orthodox are one holy catholic and apostolic.  It is said that the schism is material and not formal.

Catholics are allowed to receive Orthodox sacraments for the good of the soul, whether that is at death or in a time in life when there is some compelling spiritual need.  It actually happens that way though it is not widely advertised.

M.
Logged

Seafra
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: British Orthodox hopeful
Posts: 230


It's in the shelter of each other that people live

Mr.Dougherty
WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2012, 05:33:08 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy. Early on, many Orthodox were advised to receive Communion in an Anglican Church, which was willing to extend sacramental hospitality without the strings attached by Catholicism... but this is clearly no longer an option, and it is questionable whether it was the correct decision at the time...

If we are legitimately unable to attend Church, we trust in God to provide for us. We pray at home. We use what is available to us. It is entirely different than choosing not to go to Church and receive Communion. Some can only commute long distance infrequently to commune, and otherwise must pray in the home.
Ah I see thanks for that! i was unaware Rome made such consequences...

In reality there are no strings attached from the Catholic point of view.  Not sure where that idea comes from but the openness of Catholic sacraments to Orthodox believers is not some attempt to "make" Orthodox believers papists.  It is in recognition that the Orthodox are one holy catholic and apostolic.  It is said that the schism is material and not formal.

Catholics are allowed to receive Orthodox sacraments for the good of the soul, whether that is at death or in a time in life when there is some compelling spiritual need.  It actually happens that way though it is not widely advertised.

M.
So thats kinds conflicting to what everyone else is saying.

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy. Early on, many Orthodox were advised to receive Communion in an Anglican Church, which was willing to extend sacramental hospitality without the strings attached by Catholicism... but this is clearly no longer an option, and it is questionable whether it was the correct decision at the time...

If we are legitimately unable to attend Church, we trust in God to provide for us. We pray at home. We use what is available to us. It is entirely different than choosing not to go to Church and receive Communion. Some can only commute long distance infrequently to commune, and otherwise must pray in the home.
Ah I see thanks for that! i was unaware Rome made such consequences...
would it not be okay to attend a catholic liturgy and not participate in communion? or is that a taboo?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,365



« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2012, 05:46:20 PM »

Who cares?
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
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #16 on: February 09, 2012, 06:13:23 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy. Early on, many Orthodox were advised to receive Communion in an Anglican Church, which was willing to extend sacramental hospitality without the strings attached by Catholicism... but this is clearly no longer an option, and it is questionable whether it was the correct decision at the time...

If we are legitimately unable to attend Church, we trust in God to provide for us. We pray at home. We use what is available to us. It is entirely different than choosing not to go to Church and receive Communion. Some can only commute long distance infrequently to commune, and otherwise must pray in the home.
Ah I see thanks for that! i was unaware Rome made such consequences...

In reality there are no strings attached from the Catholic point of view.  Not sure where that idea comes from but the openness of Catholic sacraments to Orthodox believers is not some attempt to "make" Orthodox believers papists.  It is in recognition that the Orthodox are one holy catholic and apostolic.  It is said that the schism is material and not formal.

Catholics are allowed to receive Orthodox sacraments for the good of the soul, whether that is at death or in a time in life when there is some compelling spiritual need.  It actually happens that way though it is not widely advertised.

M.
So thats kinds conflicting to what everyone else is saying.

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).
I am curious if an orthodox is in an area heavily populated mostly by Catholics and there aren't any Orthodox parishes within hours, would this not be a case where Orthodox could have a reason?

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy. Early on, many Orthodox were advised to receive Communion in an Anglican Church, which was willing to extend sacramental hospitality without the strings attached by Catholicism... but this is clearly no longer an option, and it is questionable whether it was the correct decision at the time...

If we are legitimately unable to attend Church, we trust in God to provide for us. We pray at home. We use what is available to us. It is entirely different than choosing not to go to Church and receive Communion. Some can only commute long distance infrequently to commune, and otherwise must pray in the home.
Ah I see thanks for that! i was unaware Rome made such consequences...
would it not be okay to attend a catholic liturgy and not participate in communion? or is that a taboo?

Depends on who you ask.  Some Orthodox hold that Orthodox may not pray with Catholics or other "heretics".  Those who do not hold that we are "heretics" might just say it *is* alright.  From a Catholic point of view, it is perfectly alright.
Logged

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

Faith: British Orthodox hopeful
Posts: 230


It's in the shelter of each other that people live

Mr.Dougherty
WWW
« Reply #17 on: February 09, 2012, 06:24:02 PM »

Who cares?
I care. That would be why I ask. I hope to convert son I also plan to move to Ireland in an area that is untouched by orthodoxy and this is something I would like to know about.
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,611


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #18 on: February 09, 2012, 06:38:45 PM »

Generally no...

The Catholic POV is that receiving Communion in the RC Church, in addition to everything else it is, is making a public proclamation of obedience to the Pope, and acceptance of all doctrines of Rome. It is seen as technically becoming Catholic (not for Protestants who would need to be Baptised, but for Orthodox who are already Baptised from Rome's point of view, and are merely in schism... Communing is seen as repenting of the schism). So Communing in a Catholic Church is tantamount to publicly rejecting Orthodoxy, and accepting many teachings foreign to Orthodoxy.

I think you are wrong. I was told many times that we are those who consider Communion as a proclamation of the Creed.

That is true. Orthodox Christians should not receive communion in non-Orthodox Churches because then we would be agreeing to their ecclesiology and committing scandal. Thus, we would be committing such a serious sin that we might be penanced for at least one year if we were to confess this in the Orthodox Church.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #19 on: February 09, 2012, 07:19:42 PM »

Who cares?
I care. That would be why I ask. I hope to convert son I also plan to move to Ireland in an area that is untouched by orthodoxy and this is something I would like to know about.

While he put it brusquely, ialmisry's point is very real. Presumably you are hoping to convert to British Orthodoxy (the one under the Coptic Orthodox Church I believe?) because you believe it is the true Church. If that is not what you think, then you shouldn't be converting. If that is what you think, then the opinion of any other group (RC, Lutheran, Baptists, Muslims, etc) is largely irrelevent except as seen through the lens of the true Church. If the British Orthodox Church allows its adherents to partake of RC sacraments, then it doesn't matter why the RCC allows it, you would be doing so based on the BOC's reasoning. If the BOC doesn't allow it, then it doesn't matter at all what the RCC allows.

(Have you checked with Fr. Peter or another priest or bishop of the BOC?)
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Seafra
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: British Orthodox hopeful
Posts: 230


It's in the shelter of each other that people live

Mr.Dougherty
WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 09, 2012, 07:24:25 PM »

Who cares?
I care. That would be why I ask. I hope to convert son I also plan to move to Ireland in an area that is untouched by orthodoxy and this is something I would like to know about.

While he put it brusquely, ialmisry's point is very real. Presumably you are hoping to convert to British Orthodoxy (the one under the Coptic Orthodox Church I believe?) because you believe it is the true Church. If that is not what you think, then you shouldn't be converting. If that is what you think, then the opinion of any other group (RC, Lutheran, Baptists, Muslims, etc) is largely irrelevent except as seen through the lens of the true Church. If the British Orthodox Church allows its adherents to partake of RC sacraments, then it doesn't matter why the RCC allows it, you would be doing so based on the BOC's reasoning. If the BOC doesn't allow it, then it doesn't matter at all what the RCC allows.

(Have you checked with Fr. Peter or another priest or bishop of the BOC?)
no i havent because i came to understand that its largely not accepted. The part of attending liturgy w/o communion just came to me today so i figured i would just get opinions. I understand that that at the end of the line its dependent on the Bishop, but its also good to know how and why the church operates the way it does.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2012, 07:24:43 PM by Seafra » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,365



« Reply #21 on: February 09, 2012, 11:43:56 PM »

Who cares?
I care. That would be why I ask. I hope to convert son I also plan to move to Ireland in an area that is untouched by orthodoxy and this is something I would like to know about.
Then you will be doing the touching.  More important is what Orthodoxy's official stance on the Vatican., not the reverse.

Given your situation, you might, contrary to your OP, be interested in individuals' stances within the Vatican's flock, as that is what you will be dealing with, not an abstract, rarified official pronouncement from the Vatican.

Btw, you do know that there are Orthodox in Ireland?  Since it takes 7 hours to go from one extreme of the island to another, you will not be totally devoid of fellowship.  Where are you going?
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2012, 07:52:29 PM »

Who cares?
I care. That would be why I ask. I hope to convert son I also plan to move to Ireland in an area that is untouched by orthodoxy and this is something I would like to know about.

While he put it brusquely, ialmisry's point is very real. Presumably you are hoping to convert to British Orthodoxy (the one under the Coptic Orthodox Church I believe?) because you believe it is the true Church. If that is not what you think, then you shouldn't be converting. If that is what you think, then the opinion of any other group (RC, Lutheran, Baptists, Muslims, etc) is largely irrelevent except as seen through the lens of the true Church. If the British Orthodox Church allows its adherents to partake of RC sacraments, then it doesn't matter why the RCC allows it, you would be doing so based on the BOC's reasoning. If the BOC doesn't allow it, then it doesn't matter at all what the RCC allows.

(Have you checked with Fr. Peter or another priest or bishop of the BOC?)

You got all that from "Who cares?"?  Shocked

Smiley Seriously though, I see your point; but I think you might be confusing Seafra, who asked about the Orthodox p.o.v., with TruthSeeker, who asked about the Roman p.o.v. (about 6 years ago).
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #23 on: February 16, 2012, 07:55:30 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).

It isn't even true to say that "From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion."
Logged

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

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



« Reply #24 on: February 16, 2012, 08:42:50 PM »

It isn't even true to say that "From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion."

Between churches, there are barriers, we know the obvious ones and couold dispute over the minor ones that some might find disagreement over whether or not they are worth maintianing schism, but yes there are barriers to intercommunoin between churches.

On a more personal level of the faithful, according to Roman canon law, a RC priest is not allowed to turn away anyone Orthdox from the chalice as long as they are properly prepared, and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them. There is no barrier here from Rome preventing the intercommunion of the faithful.
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
LBK
Moderated
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,485


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #25 on: February 16, 2012, 08:51:37 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 16, 2012, 09:03:21 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?
Logged

Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,611


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #27 on: February 16, 2012, 09:05:13 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?

false ecumenism
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 16, 2012, 09:14:28 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?

false ecumenism

That's about par, since what we are talking about is communion. 

I guess its the real deal from the chalice for Orthodox believers but if an eastern Catholic communes...not so much...just a bit of 'false ecumenism'...

You are learning fast!!
Logged

LBK
Moderated
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,485


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #29 on: February 16, 2012, 09:23:53 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?

Proof, please, including statements from official Orthodox sources (synodal or patriarchal) which state that this is acceptable.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #30 on: February 16, 2012, 09:30:21 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking.

I understand, but I want to clarify the position of the Roman Communion because many people on this forum seem to misunderstand it. (And it was the original question on this thread -- for whatever that's worth after 6 years.  Cool)

"If necessity requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it and provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is permitted for Catholic Christian faithful, for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers, in whose Churches these sacraments are valid."

Notice there are 4 conditions embedded in that statement:

- "If necessity requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it"
- "provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided"
- "... for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister"
- "... in whose Churches these sacraments are valid"
« Last Edit: February 16, 2012, 09:32:59 PM by Peter J » Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 16, 2012, 09:36:29 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking.

I understand, but I want to clarify the position of the Roman Communion because many people on this forum seem to misunderstand it. (And it was the original question on this thread -- for whatever that's worth after 6 years.  Cool)

"If necessity requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it and provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is permitted for Catholic Christian faithful, for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers, in whose Churches these sacraments are valid."

Notice there are 4 conditions embedded in that statement:

- "If necessity requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it"
- "provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided"
- "... for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister"
- "... in whose Churches these sacraments are valid"


I have noted before in this section of OC.net that the phrase "for the salvation of my soul" is a petition that is heard by Orthodox and Catholic bishops alike, when that statement is make with good reason and apparent need.  Not all Orthodox bishops will yield to the need for a Catholic penitent and prospective communicant, but it has happened, it is happening and I expect it will continue happening in more than a few places and over time.

PS: thanks to Peter for his contribution above.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2012, 09:38:01 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

LBK
Moderated
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,485


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #32 on: February 16, 2012, 09:48:40 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?

Proof, please, including statements from official Orthodox sources (synodal or patriarchal) which state that this is acceptable.

We're waiting, EM. Or are you going to weasel out again?
Logged
Adela
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 644



« Reply #33 on: February 16, 2012, 09:50:06 PM »

This link mentions how the Roman Catholic Church views the Polish National Church, with some details about the Orthodox church in the canon discussion.  It is viewed that both  ordination and apostolic succession are valid.

http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=117963
« Last Edit: February 16, 2012, 09:51:01 PM by Adela » Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #34 on: February 16, 2012, 09:52:41 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?

EM, please provide some proof as to what you are saying here about intercommunion you have 24 hours to comply -username! Section Moderator of the Orthodox Catholic board
Logged

Adela
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 644



« Reply #35 on: February 16, 2012, 10:00:54 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?
The link I just posted does have the canon law posted for when a Roman CAtholic can receive the Eucharist from a non- Roman Catholic, but "valid" church. I'm on my IPhone and I can't cut and paste right now. But it does say the reasons why a Roman Catholic could intercomune and one is when it is spiritually profitable.
Logged
Adela
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 644



« Reply #36 on: February 16, 2012, 10:03:12 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking. So, the Roman law which allows this is, at best, meaningless, and, at worst, subversion.

And then what weasel words do you use to explain away the fact that inter-communion IS practiced and there are not consequences?
The link I just posted does have the canon law posted for when a Roman CAtholic can receive the Eucharist from a non- Roman Catholic, but "valid" church. I'm on my IPhone and I can't cut and paste right now. But it does say the reasons why a Roman Catholic could intercomune and one is when it is spiritually profitable.



Oh sorry, just realized you want Orthodox sources to say this is ok.  Yeah, probably hard to find!
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #37 on: February 16, 2012, 10:11:59 PM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 16, 2012, 10:27:45 PM »

Quote
and all RC faithful are allowed to commune in any Orthodox church that will serve them

An Orthodox priest who does this will be subject to discipline which could involve defrocking.

I understand, but I want to clarify the position of the Roman Communion because many people on this forum seem to misunderstand it. (And it was the original question on this thread -- for whatever that's worth after 6 years.  Cool)

"If necessity requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it and provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is permitted for Catholic Christian faithful, for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers, in whose Churches these sacraments are valid."

Notice there are 4 conditions embedded in that statement:

- "If necessity requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it"
- "provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided"
- "... for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister"
- "... in whose Churches these sacraments are valid"


I have noted before in this section of OC.net that the phrase "for the salvation of my soul" is a petition that is heard by Orthodox and Catholic bishops alike, when that statement is make with good reason and apparent need.  Not all Orthodox bishops will yield to the need for a Catholic penitent and prospective communicant, but it has happened, it is happening and I expect it will continue happening in more than a few places and over time.

PS: thanks to Peter for his contribution above.

There are Orthodox on this very OC.net who have acknowledged that there are places in the Orthodox world where intercommunion is commonplace.

Also I have personal knowledge of cases where Catholics commune in Orthodoxy for the good of their souls.  I've had a personal interest in this for some time which is how I know that some Orthodox bishops allow and some do not.  Those nearest to me and my circumstances do not.

Beyond this I am not able to provide what you ask for: proof.

I suspect I will be punished accordingly.

M.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #39 on: February 16, 2012, 10:32:28 PM »

The link I just posted does have the canon law posted for when a Roman CAtholic can receive the Eucharist from a non- Roman Catholic, but "valid" church. I'm on my IPhone and I can't cut and paste right now. But it does say the reasons why a Roman Catholic could intercomune and one is when it is spiritually profitable.

I think this is the paragraph you are referring to:

Quote
"§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid."

(emphasis added)
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #40 on: February 16, 2012, 10:35:57 PM »

PS: thanks to Peter for his contribution above.

You're welcome.
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2012, 01:47:30 AM »

We love orthodoxy
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #42 on: February 17, 2012, 11:15:51 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."
Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #43 on: February 17, 2012, 11:21:38 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

None of the Orthodox and Greek Catholics (ukies or carpies) inter-commune in my area.  The Greek Catholics might come to a pierogi supper and the occasional to a service they don't commune.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,206


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 17, 2012, 11:24:35 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

None of the Orthodox and Greek Catholics (ukies or carpies) inter-commune in my area.  The Greek Catholics might come to a pierogi supper and the occasional to a service they don't commune.


While we don't cast the evil eye at each other, or cross the street in front of each other's churches and we even attend things like choral concerts and cultural things, support each others picnics etc.... I am absolutely unaware of ANY ongoing intercommunion in my area or any other area where there are ACROD parishes. Thanks to the diligent efforts and prayers of our departed hierarchs, we have learned to first live with each other and secondly to better understand each other.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 11:27:53 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 17, 2012, 11:26:25 AM »

We love orthodoxy


If you love Orthodoxy, why not join?  Wink

I have never heard of any Orthodox Bishop or priest knowing allow a Catholic to receive Holy Communion.

In my church, Holy Confession is a prerequisite.  Therefore, when an "unknown" face comes up for Communion, Father knows he has not heard their Confession and they are asked to kiss the Chalice, but, do not receive the Gifts.

Other churches do not have Holy Confession as a prerequisite....and people simply crowd forward.  The priest may not know who is who and may offer the Gifts to non-Orthodox.  The same may hold true of Bishops.  They are always visting parishes and they would have NO way of knowing if those approaching are Orthodox or not.
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #46 on: February 17, 2012, 11:26:42 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

None of the Orthodox and Greek Catholics (ukies or carpies) inter-commune in my area.  The Greek Catholics might come to a pierogi supper and the occasional to a service they don't commune.


I've only reported what I know.  Cannot and will not speak for your area.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #47 on: February 17, 2012, 11:28:37 AM »

We love orthodoxy


If you love Orthodoxy, why not join?  Wink

I have never heard of any Orthodox Bishop or priest knowing allow a Catholic to receive Holy Communion.

In my church, Holy Confession is a prerequisite.  Therefore, when an "unknown" face comes up for Communion, Father knows he has not heard their Confession and they are asked to kiss the Chalice, but, do not receive the Gifts.

Other churches do not have Holy Confession as a prerequisite....and people simply crowd forward.  The priest may not know who is who and may offer the Gifts to non-Orthodox.  The same may hold true of Bishops.  They are always visting parishes and they would have NO way of knowing if those approaching are Orthodox or not.


Obviously I cannot speak for Wyatt.  Personally, I tried Orthodoxy.  I prefer and love orthodoxy. 
Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #48 on: February 17, 2012, 11:30:41 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

None of the Orthodox and Greek Catholics (ukies or carpies) inter-commune in my area.  The Greek Catholics might come to a pierogi supper and the occasional to a service they don't commune.


While we don't cast the evil eye at each other, or cross the street in front of each other's churches and we even attend things like choral concerts and cultural things, support each others picnics etc.... I am absolutely unaware of ANY intercommunion in my area or any other area where there are ACROD parishes. Thanks to the diligent efforts and prayers of our departed hierarchs, we have learned to first live with each other and secondly to better understand each other.

Here here! Well said.  Considering you have to drive through the one Greek Catholic parish's parking lot to get to the ACROD (ok the one side of it is an alley but still) you can gather there is no inter-communion.  That ACROD church just didn't build itself out of the Ruthenian Catholic parish for nothing.

My Ukie parish and the Greek Catholic parish a few miles up the road for sure don't share communion.  Most of us still have family members that attend the GC parish.  No inter communion there.  
Logged

LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #49 on: February 17, 2012, 11:32:05 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

I don't understand people who hop around.  Why not make up your minds?

In my opinion, the folks who have "no problem" attending all these various churches don't truly understand either one.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #50 on: February 17, 2012, 11:33:34 AM »

We love orthodoxy


If you love Orthodoxy, why not join?  Wink

I have never heard of any Orthodox Bishop or priest knowing allow a Catholic to receive Holy Communion.

In my church, Holy Confession is a prerequisite.  Therefore, when an "unknown" face comes up for Communion, Father knows he has not heard their Confession and they are asked to kiss the Chalice, but, do not receive the Gifts.

Other churches do not have Holy Confession as a prerequisite....and people simply crowd forward.  The priest may not know who is who and may offer the Gifts to non-Orthodox.  The same may hold true of Bishops.  They are always visting parishes and they would have NO way of knowing if those approaching are Orthodox or not.


I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,206


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #51 on: February 17, 2012, 11:35:10 AM »

We love orthodoxy


If you love Orthodoxy, why not join?  Wink

I have never heard of any Orthodox Bishop or priest knowing allow a Catholic to receive Holy Communion.

In my church, Holy Confession is a prerequisite.  Therefore, when an "unknown" face comes up for Communion, Father knows he has not heard their Confession and they are asked to kiss the Chalice, but, do not receive the Gifts.

Other churches do not have Holy Confession as a prerequisite....and people simply crowd forward.  The priest may not know who is who and may offer the Gifts to non-Orthodox.  The same may hold true of Bishops.  They are always visting parishes and they would have NO way of knowing if those approaching are Orthodox or not.


I think you have hit the nail on the head.

With that, I concur as well.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #52 on: February 17, 2012, 11:38:43 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

I don't understand people who hop around.  Why not make up your minds?

In my opinion, the folks who have "no problem" attending all these various churches don't truly understand either one.



Well...who's to say?  Or judge?  Some of these folks are very highly catechized  (as much or more than many of the very knowledgeable and insightful people who post on this board, myself obviously included) and actually some teach catechesis!  One of my wife's ByzCath cousins teaches catechism classes at the......Orthodox church!  Eeeeekk  Shocked Shocked Shocked

Are you saying, too, that the priests who commune them "don't truly understand either one"?
Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #53 on: February 17, 2012, 11:42:26 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

I don't understand people who hop around.  Why not make up your minds?

In my opinion, the folks who have "no problem" attending all these various churches don't truly understand either one.



Well...who's to say?  Or judge?  Some of these folks are very highly catechized  (as much or more than many of the very knowledgeable and insightful people who post on this board, myself obviously included) and actually some teach catechesis!  One of my wife's ByzCath cousins teaches catechism classes at the......Orthodox church!  Eeeeekk  Shocked Shocked Shocked

Are you saying, too, that the priests who commune them "don't truly understand either one"?

Ok so in Pittsburgh you are reporting a long-standing inter-communion exists?  Just curious because you sound like you are from there... the only places I have heard the same stories were in Pittsburgh. 
I know when the Revised Divine Liturgy happened a lot of my friend's Byzantine Catholic parish including him left for Orthodoxy. 
Pittsburgh is its own world.
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #54 on: February 17, 2012, 11:47:15 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

I don't understand people who hop around.  Why not make up your minds?

In my opinion, the folks who have "no problem" attending all these various churches don't truly understand either one.



Well...who's to say?  Or judge?  Some of these folks are very highly catechized  (as much or more than many of the very knowledgeable and insightful people who post on this board, myself obviously included) and actually some teach catechesis!  One of my wife's ByzCath cousins teaches catechism classes at the......Orthodox church!  Eeeeekk  Shocked Shocked Shocked

Are you saying, too, that the priests who commune them "don't truly understand either one"?

Ok so in Pittsburgh you are reporting a long-standing inter-communion exists?  Just curious because you sound like you are from there... the only places I have heard the same stories were in Pittsburgh.  
I know when the Revised Divine Liturgy happened a lot of my friend's Byzantine Catholic parish including him left for Orthodoxy.  
Pittsburgh is its own world.

Ahhh....so you *have* heard of intercommunion before?!  Interesting!  I recall other people on this board reporting that such intercommunion is also not at all unheard of in a number of places in Europe, mainly Central and Eastern Europe.

I am not from Pittsburgh.  Most of my wife's family that I'm referring to live in Western PA--some in the Pittsburgh area.  

"Pittsburgh is its own world"--what, totally cut off from the rest of the planet??  I know it's a pretty unique area and I love it--may even move up there one day (watch out  Roll Eyes Grin Roll Eyes Grin!!), but as far as I know it's still subject to the laws of gravity, the laws of the Church, etc.  Or...have those all been suspended there by way of some form of special dispensation from both Churches??

« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 11:52:33 AM by J Michael » Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #55 on: February 17, 2012, 11:53:54 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

I don't understand people who hop around.  Why not make up your minds?

In my opinion, the folks who have "no problem" attending all these various churches don't truly understand either one.



Well...who's to say?  Or judge?  Some of these folks are very highly catechized  (as much or more than many of the very knowledgeable and insightful people who post on this board, myself obviously included) and actually some teach catechesis!  One of my wife's ByzCath cousins teaches catechism classes at the......Orthodox church!  Eeeeekk  Shocked Shocked Shocked

Are you saying, too, that the priests who commune them "don't truly understand either one"?

Ok so in Pittsburgh you are reporting a long-standing inter-communion exists?  Just curious because you sound like you are from there... the only places I have heard the same stories were in Pittsburgh.  
I know when the Revised Divine Liturgy happened a lot of my friend's Byzantine Catholic parish including him left for Orthodoxy.  
Pittsburgh is its own world.

Ahhh....so you *have* heard of intercommunion before?!  Interesting!  I recall other people on this board reporting that such intercommunion is also not at all unheard of in a number of places in Europe, mainly Central and Eastern Europe.

I am not from Pittsburgh.  Most of my wife's family that I'm referring to live in Western PA--some in the Pittsburgh area.  

"Pittsburgh is its own world"--what, totally cut off from the rest of the planet??  I know it's a pretty unique area and I love it--may even move up there one day (watch out  Roll Eyes Grin Roll Eyes Grin!!), but as far as I know it's still subject to the laws of gravity, the laws of the Church, etc.  Or...have those all been suspended there by way of some form of special dispensation from both Churches??



No I've never heard inter-communion.  Just that people will go to their wives byzcath church for a while then go to the orthodox for a while.  I've never myself have heard them say they receive in both churches.
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #56 on: February 17, 2012, 11:58:34 AM »

From a moderator standpoint what I see is EM trying to substantiate that intercommunion is an on going happening more than just someone receiving at an integral moment in their life.  That is why I am asking her for the source because we are all aware of what the RCC says in it's missals and such. -username! section moderator

I don't believe there is any "official" documentary evidence in either the Catholic or Orthodox Churches that Mary can provide as so-called "proof".  Anything that she or others would provide would basically be anecdotal.  For instance....my wife has a plethora of family members in Pennsylvania;  most are Byzantine Catholic;  a few are Roman Catholic;  even fewer still are Orthodox; almost *all* of them not infrequently attend Liturgy in all 3 churches mentioned--ByzCath, RC, and OC--obviously not simultaneously  Cheesy.  The communities they live in and visit and attend Liturgies in are small.  The priests (and bishops) tend to know everyone and everyone tends to know them.  They know who's who and what's what.  They (my wife's family members) commune in all the above churches, with the knowledge and consent of the priests (and bishops) who know they are what they are.  This is, rightly or wrongly, licitly or illicitly, canonically or uncanonically, officially or unofficially, and whether anyone *here* likes it or not----intercommunion.

To quote Wyatt from above: "We [and they] love orthodoxy."

I don't understand people who hop around.  Why not make up your minds?

In my opinion, the folks who have "no problem" attending all these various churches don't truly understand either one.



Well...who's to say?  Or judge?  Some of these folks are very highly catechized  (as much or more than many of the very knowledgeable and insightful people who post on this board, myself obviously included) and actually some teach catechesis!  One of my wife's ByzCath cousins teaches catechism classes at the......Orthodox church!  Eeeeekk  Shocked Shocked Shocked

Are you saying, too, that the priests who commune them "don't truly understand either one"?

Ok so in Pittsburgh you are reporting a long-standing inter-communion exists?  Just curious because you sound like you are from there... the only places I have heard the same stories were in Pittsburgh.  
I know when the Revised Divine Liturgy happened a lot of my friend's Byzantine Catholic parish including him left for Orthodoxy.  
Pittsburgh is its own world.

Ahhh....so you *have* heard of intercommunion before?!  Interesting!  I recall other people on this board reporting that such intercommunion is also not at all unheard of in a number of places in Europe, mainly Central and Eastern Europe.

I am not from Pittsburgh.  Most of my wife's family that I'm referring to live in Western PA--some in the Pittsburgh area.  

"Pittsburgh is its own world"--what, totally cut off from the rest of the planet??  I know it's a pretty unique area and I love it--may even move up there one day (watch out  Roll Eyes Grin Roll Eyes Grin!!), but as far as I know it's still subject to the laws of gravity, the laws of the Church, etc.  Or...have those all been suspended there by way of some form of special dispensation from both Churches??



No I've never heard inter-communion.  Just that people will go to their wives byzcath church for a while then go to the orthodox for a while.  I've never myself have heard them say they receive in both churches.

Not to pick too many nits that are too small, but you *did* say, "...the only places I have heard the same stories were in Pittsburgh."  And we *were* talking about intercommunion.  Or so the words in these posts have led me to believe.

And, just because you never "heard them say...." does not mean it didn't happen.  Doesn't mean it did, either, but my point about that is that you can't draw a conclusion about it one way or the other based just the fact that they went to the others' church.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #57 on: February 17, 2012, 12:16:07 PM »



....and since you didn't see it happen, only heard about it..... Wink
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #58 on: February 17, 2012, 12:19:19 PM »


Well...who's to say?  Or judge?  Some of these folks are very highly catechized  (as much or more than many of the very knowledgeable and insightful people who post on this board, myself obviously included) and actually some teach catechesis!  One of my wife's ByzCath cousins teaches catechism classes at the......Orthodox church!  Eeeeekk  Shocked Shocked Shocked

Are you saying, too, that the priests who commune them "don't truly understand either one"?

God have mercy upon the Orthodox priest who knowingly gives the Holy Gifts to non-Orthodox.  Yes, I would say he also does NOT know about his own Faith.

....and I am NOT judging.....I am stating a fact.  ....because if they DID, they wouldn't be doing this.


« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 12:19:59 PM by LizaSymonenko » Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #59 on: February 17, 2012, 12:25:44 PM »


Well...who's to say?  Or judge?  Some of these folks are very highly catechized  (as much or more than many of the very knowledgeable and insightful people who post on this board, myself obviously included) and actually some teach catechesis!  One of my wife's ByzCath cousins teaches catechism classes at the......Orthodox church!  Eeeeekk  Shocked Shocked Shocked

Are you saying, too, that the priests who commune them "don't truly understand either one"?

God have mercy upon the Orthodox priest who knowingly gives the Holy Gifts to non-Orthodox.  Yes, I would say he also does NOT know about his own Faith.

....and I am NOT judging.....I am stating a fact.  ....because if they DID, they wouldn't be doing this.




I'm not qualified to say.  Maybe the priests in Western Pa. (which username claims is in a world of its own  Roll Eyes--well, Pittsburgh, anyway  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes), and various places in Europe where intercommunion reportedly occurs fairly regularly just aren't very good or very well educated priests.  Or maybe they know something that many others are not willing to admit.  But, what do I know  angel?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 12:28:53 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #60 on: February 17, 2012, 12:31:29 PM »



....and since you didn't see it happen, only heard about it..... Wink

I like to think that what my wife and her family tell me is truthful.  Go figure  Roll Eyes.
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #61 on: February 17, 2012, 01:56:57 PM »

We love orthodoxy
If you love Orthodoxy, why not join?  Wink
I was actually responding to the thread title, which says "orthodoxy" and not "Orthodoxy," but I know that you are referring to the Eastern Orthodox Church here. Unfortunately, just joining is not that simple. I admire and respect the Orthodox Church, but I cannot dislike my own Church enough to leave, nor can I abandon all of the beliefs that I have now which separate us.
Logged
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #62 on: February 17, 2012, 02:04:47 PM »


If I may ask, which beliefs are these that keep you so solidly RC?

...not being mean, just honestly curious.
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #63 on: February 17, 2012, 02:06:23 PM »



....and since you didn't see it happen, only heard about it..... Wink

I like to think that what my wife and her family tell me is truthful.  Go figure  Roll Eyes.

I don't know some in-laws you gotta wonder....... har har har..........
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #64 on: February 17, 2012, 02:07:56 PM »

Personally, I tried Orthodoxy. 

You've got me there. I've never tried Orthodoxy (in the sense of joining it, I mean).
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #65 on: February 17, 2012, 02:09:39 PM »



....and since you didn't see it happen, only heard about it..... Wink

I like to think that what my wife and her family tell me is truthful.  Go figure  Roll Eyes.

I don't know some in-laws you gotta wonder....... har har har..........


Well, there's in-laws and out-laws.  I call my in-laws out-laws.  But they mutated differently from the Western Pa. folks  laugh laugh laugh.
Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #66 on: February 17, 2012, 02:14:45 PM »



....and since you didn't see it happen, only heard about it..... Wink

I like to think that what my wife and her family tell me is truthful.  Go figure  Roll Eyes.

I don't know some in-laws you gotta wonder....... har har har..........


Well, there's in-laws and out-laws.  I call my in-laws out-laws.  But they mutated differently from the Western Pa. folks  laugh laugh laugh.

I think we've all contemplated if we missed our chance to be a desert hermit at one point in life (with the cave having air conditioning). 
Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #67 on: February 17, 2012, 02:36:09 PM »


If I may ask, which beliefs are these that keep you so solidly RC?

...not being mean, just honestly curious.
There are beliefs that I would have to renounce to become Eastern Orthodox that I either A. don't have a problem with, or B. believe strongly and could not in good conscience give up. I'm sure you know the list as it's a familiar one: filioque, purgatory, unique role of the Bishop of Rome in the Church, the Immaculate Conception, etc. Now granted, I am already imperfectly in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Communion as my Church teaches...otherwise my Church would not permit me to receive the Eucharist in an Eastern Orthodox Church, which I am allowed to do (although I would not since that would be against you guys' rules). However, in order for me to be in full communion with your Church according to the criteria of your Church, I would have to renounce belief in doctrines that I cannot give up. That would be quite a difficult mental feat, as I have already had to reprogram myself to accept the teachings of Catholicism since I was Protestant all my life before joining the Catholic Church. Trying to un-believe teachings that I spent a lot of time studying and ultimately accepting would feel like backtracking. That may sound silly, but transitioning from a largely evangelical Protestant background to Catholicism is quite a journey.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 02:36:53 PM by Wyatt » Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #68 on: February 17, 2012, 05:45:04 PM »

You've got me there. I've never tried Orthodoxy (in the sense of joining it, I mean).

Perhaps the way I phrased that wasn't the best.

It's not that I never considered becoming Orthodox. I did. But I never considered becoming Orthodox just to try it.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #69 on: February 17, 2012, 05:56:16 PM »

You've got me there. I've never tried Orthodoxy (in the sense of joining it, I mean).

Perhaps the way I phrased that wasn't the best.

It's not that I never considered becoming Orthodox. I did. But I never considered becoming Orthodox just to try it.

Why would you?  Consider converting "just to try it", that is.  I take you as a far more serious and sincere person than to do something like that.  As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 05:57:32 PM by J Michael » Logged

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

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #70 on: February 17, 2012, 06:06:57 PM »

We love orthodoxy


If you love Orthodoxy, why not join?  Wink

I have never heard of any Orthodox Bishop or priest knowing allow a Catholic to receive Holy Communion.

In my church, Holy Confession is a prerequisite.  Therefore, when an "unknown" face comes up for Communion, Father knows he has not heard their Confession and they are asked to kiss the Chalice, but, do not receive the Gifts.

Other churches do not have Holy Confession as a prerequisite....and people simply crowd forward.  The priest may not know who is who and may offer the Gifts to non-Orthodox.  The same may hold true of Bishops.  They are always visting parishes and they would have NO way of knowing if those approaching are Orthodox or not.


I think you have hit the nail on the head.

With that, I concur as well.


Don't they simply ask a strange face if they are Orthodox? At least, that is what happened to me in Greece.

Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #71 on: February 17, 2012, 06:43:24 PM »


Not when there's a few hundred people approaching.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #72 on: February 17, 2012, 06:52:00 PM »


Not when there's a few hundred people approaching.



Um actually, that is incorrect. In all cases of my experience, there were a few hundred people approaching. Even my husband, approaching with the men and who looks more likely to be Greek than I, was asked. 
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #73 on: February 17, 2012, 06:55:24 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,206


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #74 on: February 17, 2012, 07:17:30 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley
Logged
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #75 on: February 17, 2012, 07:20:00 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #76 on: February 17, 2012, 07:25:14 PM »


Not when there's a few hundred people approaching.



Um actually, that is incorrect. In all cases of my experience, there were a few hundred people approaching. Even my husband, approaching with the men and who looks more likely to be Greek than I, was asked. 

Then...that responsibility lies with the priest...and he will answer for it one day.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #77 on: February 17, 2012, 08:54:14 PM »


Not when there's a few hundred people approaching.



Um actually, that is incorrect. In all cases of my experience, there were a few hundred people approaching. Even my husband, approaching with the men and who looks more likely to be Greek than I, was asked. 

Then...that responsibility lies with the priest...and he will answer for it one day.



Which day?  and to whom?
Logged

LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #78 on: February 17, 2012, 09:20:31 PM »



He will answer for his wrong doings, as we all will, on the final day of Judgement, to God.
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #79 on: February 17, 2012, 09:28:01 PM »



He will answer for his wrong doings, as we all will, on the final day of Judgement, to God.

I thought as much.  Have you given some thought to the reality that by then there will be no schism?

Does it ever cross your mind that as we defend across schismatic lines that we are NONE of us pleasing to God?
Logged

LBK
Moderated
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,485


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #80 on: February 17, 2012, 09:35:04 PM »

Quote
Have you given some thought to the reality that by then there will be no schism?

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.

Quote
Does it ever cross your mind that as we defend across schismatic lines that we are NONE of us pleasing to God?

Depends on who is canonical and Orthodox, and who is schismatic. I know which side I'm on.  angel
Logged
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #81 on: February 17, 2012, 09:47:43 PM »


Not when there's a few hundred people approaching.



Um actually, that is incorrect. In all cases of my experience, there were a few hundred people approaching. Even my husband, approaching with the men and who looks more likely to be Greek than I, was asked. 

Then...that responsibility lies with the priest...and he will answer for it one day.



I don't understand your comment. What will he answer for? Checking that a foreign looking woman was Orthodox before communing her? Isn't he supposed to do that?
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #82 on: February 17, 2012, 09:58:31 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.
OICWR= Orthodox In Crimea of the Welsh Rite
? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley
Logged

LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #83 on: February 17, 2012, 10:17:42 PM »


Not when there's a few hundred people approaching.



Um actually, that is incorrect. In all cases of my experience, there were a few hundred people approaching. Even my husband, approaching with the men and who looks more likely to be Greek than I, was asked. 

Then...that responsibility lies with the priest...and he will answer for it one day.




I don't understand your comment. What will he answer for? Checking that a foreign looking woman was Orthodox before communing her? Isn't he supposed to do that?

I am referring to the priest who knowingly gives the Holy Gifts to non-Orthodox.

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #84 on: February 17, 2012, 10:30:11 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.

Yes. If you want to read his whole offensive post:

Quote
The OICWR crowd is a tiny but vocal minority resident mostly online at ByzCath. They are not representative of the countless good Eastern Catholics one finds in church on Sunday.

I would beg to differ that these malcontents do not display a toxic anti-Westernism. That is pretty much all they are about, save a tenuous and virtually meaningless communion with Rome.

Most dox. And they should, in the interest of honesty.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #85 on: February 17, 2012, 10:34:41 PM »

He will answer for his wrong doings, as we all will, on the final day of Judgement, to God.

I thought as much.  Have you given some thought to the reality that by then there will be no schism?

I agree that there won't be schism on the day of Judgement, but I don't know you're asking.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #86 on: February 17, 2012, 10:36:32 PM »

Does it ever cross your mind that as we defend across schismatic lines that we are NONE of us pleasing to God?

There are plenty who would be willing to intercommune with you (TEC, ELCA, United Methodists, etc).
Logged

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

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #87 on: February 17, 2012, 10:56:02 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.

Yes. If you want to read his whole offensive post:

Quote
The OICWR crowd is a tiny but vocal minority resident mostly online at ByzCath. They are not representative of the countless good Eastern Catholics one finds in church on Sunday.

I would beg to differ that these malcontents do not display a toxic anti-Westernism. That is pretty much all they are about, save a tenuous and virtually meaningless communion with Rome.

Most dox. And they should, in the interest of honesty.

People are strange, aren't we?
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #88 on: February 17, 2012, 11:09:35 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.

Yes. If you want to read his whole offensive post:

Quote
The OICWR crowd is a tiny but vocal minority resident mostly online at ByzCath. They are not representative of the countless good Eastern Catholics one finds in church on Sunday.

I would beg to differ that these malcontents do not display a toxic anti-Westernism. That is pretty much all they are about, save a tenuous and virtually meaningless communion with Rome.

Most dox. And they should, in the interest of honesty.

Where are you getting the above quote?

Most don't go Orthodox.  Most stay Greek Catholic.  It's their choice and their life.  Their parishes are just as tight knit and have the same culture and so forth that the Orthodox Church across the street has.
Except they;
don't own their parish building the diocese holds the deed
don't pay their priest salary directly, the diocese (eparchy) does
the list can go on
My fav story;
friend is an Orthodox priest but his father in law is a Greek Catholic priest
His f-i-l said "when a window breaks in an Orthodox rectory it takes 3 parish council meetings to decide to do it meanwhile while harassing the priest about the heating bill going up because the window hasn't been fixed and then they have to find the person who will do it for the cheapest, When my window breaks I just call up and have it replaced and the chuch draws up the cheque"

That statement says a lot.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 11:10:47 PM by username! » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #89 on: February 17, 2012, 11:18:59 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.

Yes. If you want to read his whole offensive post:

Quote
The OICWR crowd is a tiny but vocal minority resident mostly online at ByzCath. They are not representative of the countless good Eastern Catholics one finds in church on Sunday.

I would beg to differ that these malcontents do not display a toxic anti-Westernism. That is pretty much all they are about, save a tenuous and virtually meaningless communion with Rome.

Most dox. And they should, in the interest of honesty.

Where are you getting the above quote?

Most don't go Orthodox.

Good luck telling Fr. Steele that. Grin In any case, personally I find it stranger that he, a Roman Catholic priest, said they should convert to Orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 11:22:49 PM by Peter J » Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #90 on: February 18, 2012, 12:35:14 AM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Depends on who is canonical and Orthodox, and who is schismatic. I know which side I'm on.  angel
Concepts like canonical and noncanonical, valid and invalid, licit and illicit only exist on Earth. In eternity there will only be two distinctions: saved or damned.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #91 on: February 18, 2012, 05:10:19 AM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #92 on: February 18, 2012, 11:40:32 AM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.

What does *that* mean?? 
Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #93 on: February 18, 2012, 11:45:10 AM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.

Nie rozumiem...... Mike......Czy mógłbyś mi pomóc zrozumieć?  What do you mean?
Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #94 on: February 18, 2012, 12:01:23 PM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.
Reminds me of the pastor at the Lutheran school I went to. I already felt like somewhat of a pariah at the school since I was one of the few students who wasn't Lutheran, but one day the pastor was teaching religion class and he said, "We don't believe that you have to be Lutheran to go to heaven, but when we all get to heaven, everyone will be Lutheran."
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #95 on: February 18, 2012, 12:28:25 PM »

I, too, have a reply; but I fear it would be a tangent-from-a-tangent, so I'm putting it here.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #96 on: February 18, 2012, 02:43:08 PM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.

St. Peter to the recently admitted Jew (or whatever) to heaven:  "You should be as quiet as possible and not disturb those in the room across the hall."  "Why's that?," asked the Jew.  "Well, the Orthodox are in there and they think they're the only ones here."  Grin Shocked angel
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,975


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #97 on: February 18, 2012, 02:46:11 PM »

Hee hee  Wink
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/
TheMathematician
Banished and Disgraced
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 1,410


Formerly known as Montalo


« Reply #98 on: February 18, 2012, 03:00:09 PM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.

St. Peter to the recently admitted Jew (or whatever) to heaven:  "You should be as quiet as possible and not disturb those in the room across the hall."  "Why's that?," asked the Jew.  "Well, the Orthodox are in there and they think they're the only ones here."  Grin Shocked angel

St. Peter to the recently admitted Jew to heaven:  "You should be as quiet as possible and not disturb those in the room across the hall."  "Why's that?," asked the Jew.  "Well, the Catholics are in there and they think they're the only ones here."
Tongue
so easily reversed Tongue
Logged

SCREW BON JOVI!
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #99 on: February 18, 2012, 03:24:02 PM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.

St. Peter to the recently admitted Jew (or whatever) to heaven:  "You should be as quiet as possible and not disturb those in the room across the hall."  "Why's that?," asked the Jew.  "Well, the Orthodox are in there and they think they're the only ones here."  Grin Shocked angel

St. Peter to the recently admitted Jew to heaven:  "You should be as quiet as possible and not disturb those in the room across the hall."  "Why's that?," asked the Jew.  "Well, the Catholics are in there and they think they're the only ones here."
Tongue
so easily reversed Tongue

Duhhhh!  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Why do you think I put "(or whatever)" in there?  No one faith has exclusive rights to admittance to Heaven.  That was the whole point.  But I'm thinkin' you probably knew that  Tongue.
Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #100 on: February 18, 2012, 04:20:29 PM »

Reality? So you know what the future holds with such certainty? Only God knows if there will be schism or unity on that day.
Do you really believe schism will persist in heaven? How could it?

Of course not. In Heaven everyone will be a member of our Church.

Nie rozumiem...... Mike......Czy mógłbyś mi pomóc zrozumieć?  What do you mean?

St. Cyprian of Carthage wrote that there is no salvation outside the Church what means that people who hadn't visibly been in the Church on Earth had been in there the other way.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #101 on: February 18, 2012, 06:15:44 PM »


St. Peter to the recently admitted Jew (or whatever) to heaven:  "You should be as quiet as possible and not disturb those in the room across the hall."  "Why's that?," asked the Jew.  "Well, the Orthodox are in there and they think they're the only ones here."  Grin Shocked angel

Well, I don't care who else is there, it's just good to know the Orthodox are there.   Grin
Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 12,854



WWW
« Reply #102 on: February 18, 2012, 06:20:10 PM »



He will answer for his wrong doings, as we all will, on the final day of Judgement, to God.

I thought as much.  Have you given some thought to the reality that by then there will be no schism?

Does it ever cross your mind that as we defend across schismatic lines that we are NONE of us pleasing to God?

God willing the schism will be over.

However, if still in the schismatic days, the priest or anyone else does not uphold the dogmas of their particular Church (ie. Orthodox priest offering the Holy Gifts to non-Orthodox) then even if there is no longer a schism, he still violated the law that was in place, the day that he was giving away the Holy Gifts.

Just to put it in a simple terms.    Last year a man was jailed for possession of a controlled substance.  He was tried and put in jail.   This year that particular substance has been removed from the market and is no longer available.

Should that man now be freed from prison?  Did he in fact do nothing wrong?


Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #103 on: February 18, 2012, 06:48:30 PM »



He will answer for his wrong doings, as we all will, on the final day of Judgement, to God.

I thought as much.  Have you given some thought to the reality that by then there will be no schism?

Does it ever cross your mind that as we defend across schismatic lines that we are NONE of us pleasing to God?

God willing the schism will be over.

However, if still in the schismatic days, the priest or anyone else does not uphold the dogmas of their particular Church (ie. Orthodox priest offering the Holy Gifts to non-Orthodox) then even if there is no longer a schism, he still violated the law that was in place, the day that he was giving away the Holy Gifts.

Just to put it in a simple terms.    Last year a man was jailed for possession of a controlled substance.  He was tried and put in jail.   This year that particular substance has been removed from the market and is no longer available.

Should that man now be freed from prison?  Did he in fact do nothing wrong?


Here's another this-world-bound example, albeit a projection of sorts: 

If man-boy love becomes a protect class of people in the United States under the law, should the people who were awarded large sums of money for fondling 13-14-15-16-17 year olds, and engaging in mutually agreed sex, only called rape because of the current law, be asked to return that appeasement award?

But these examples are not really at issue because they are worldly issues and not fundamental to the core of the Body of Christ which transcends time and space as we know it.

There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.   Smiley

At that point neither one of us need to wait for heaven to be united in one body, one holy, catholic and apostolic Church. 

I am looking forward to Lent this year very much.

M.

Logged

username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #104 on: February 18, 2012, 07:51:27 PM »

What is the RCC view on Orthodoxy?
The viewpoint of a 92 year old Irishman is going to be far different than a seminarian fresh out of Seton Hall.

I once was at the train station in town.  Train comes and goes.  I'm looking at this elderly priest just standing there after he got off the train.  I said, Father, I take it Father ___ was supposed to pick you up and didn't..
yes, the priest said.  I called the rectory and said, Father __  it's username! how are you?  Eating dinner.. I said did you forget the Monsignor at the train station..... pause...... ah ah, that's ok father I'll bring him over.

I get there and the parish priest says, hey Monsignor he's Orthodox even though his mother's family are good Catholics.  The Monsignor said, oh shut it Joe the holy spirit leads where the holy spirits leads and its good this young Orthodox man was there to give me a ride now come get my bag!

HAHA I had to laugh!

One time we were cantoring my great aunt's panachida in the funeral home.  A long time and now deceased family friend who was a Monsignor was in attendance.   Monsignor leans over to the person next to him and says (he was hard of hearing) "Do you suppose the priest remembers all of that service or is he using his book"
It was awesome, so the priest let the monsignor say some words about my great aunt  and he said boy you guys use a lot of words with the singing and all but I'm glad you are our brothers.

I know for a fact if you marry a RC girl in the Orthodox Church the RCC considers it "valid."

And I think in my area among the older generation that it's not so much of a distaste for the Orthodox more than it is a distaste for the "hunkies."  In my region "hunky" is the ultimate bad word for anyone Slavic. 
I remember I was at an event luncheon with the Irish family a few years back on Jan.7.  My one great uncle says, "did you go to church today for Ukrainian Christmas?" Yes I said.
Then my now deceased great uncle says to my pap "hey ___ remember that time that hunky son of a *&^
priest wouldn't let us eat meat at our St. Patrick's Day Banquet because it fell in lent?"  What followed was a general rant about how Hunkys (which refers to the Ukies, Carpies, Lemkos, Slovaks..etc.. in the area) aren't any good.
Remember though when the Ukies left the Greek Catholic Church and built the Russian Orthodox Church directly behind the Roman Catholic Church it wasn't a pleasant event and these people witnessed it.
So I don't know how much of it is really ethnic distaste manifesting itself in a disdain for the church because you seldom hear anything negative about the Orthodox from the younger folks.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2012, 08:00:40 PM by username! » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #105 on: February 18, 2012, 09:14:19 PM »

There's an old line "I wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member." (I believe Groucho Marx said it first, although many people have said it since.)

I would say that I wouldn't want to receive communion in any Church that gave communion to someone they consider a heretic, even if that someone is me.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
LBK
Moderated
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,485


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #106 on: February 19, 2012, 12:09:49 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #107 on: February 19, 2012, 01:10:17 PM »

Explanation requested for Reply #103.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #108 on: February 19, 2012, 01:13:23 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

Rome wasn't on the diptychs in 1015 (and part of 1014) either. Does that mean that Rome's status is the same now as it was in 1015? (You can make RCs very very happy by saying yes.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,975


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #109 on: February 19, 2012, 01:42:19 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

The RCC Pope and the Ecumenical Patriarch ended the excommunications of one another in 1965.

I don't care if anybody likes that or not: it really happened.

Every shiny new copy of the Daily Roman Missal says that the RCC permits Orthodox to take Communion in their churches. When the door will be opened the other way, I don't know.
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 #110 on: February 19, 2012, 02:07:52 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

Not all Orthodox agree with you in full, thankfully, I think.

So, like you, I'll stick closest to those with whom I agree most.
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #111 on: February 19, 2012, 03:38:58 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

The RCC Pope and the Ecumenical Patriarch ended the excommunications of one another in 1965.

I don't care if anybody likes that or not: it really happened.

Every shiny new copy of the Daily Roman Missal says that the RCC permits Orthodox to take Communion in their churches. When the door will be opened the other way, I don't know.

Interesting thing about doors is that, even when open, you don't *have* to go through them.  The problem, if it's even perceived as such, is that if you don't go through, you're stuck where you are.  And I'm sure that's just fine and dandy for many folks, Orthodox and otherwise.  No one is *required* to acknowledge a welcome or reciprocate.  "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will."

Not only have the excommunications been lifted (they were never applied to all the faithful of either Church, anyway--just particular individuals, from what I understand), but, diptychs aside, there *is*, here and there, intercommunion.  As far as the diptychs are concerned, all that could change in an instant.  It probably won't, more's the pity, but it *could*.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2012, 03:42:53 PM by J Michael » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #112 on: February 19, 2012, 03:57:31 PM »

Interesting thing about doors is that, even when open, you don't *have* to go through them.  The problem, if it's even perceived as such, is that if you don't go through, you're stuck where you are.

From the Roman p.o.v. -- at least traditionally -- Orthodox who don't go through the door remain outside of the one true church.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #113 on: February 19, 2012, 04:02:17 PM »

Interesting thing about doors is that, even when open, you don't *have* to go through them.  The problem, if it's even perceived as such, is that if you don't go through, you're stuck where you are.

From the Roman p.o.v. -- at least traditionally -- Orthodox who don't go through the door remain outside of the one true church.

Outside of it?  Whatever happened to us (Catholic and Orthodox) being in communion, albeit an imperfect communion? What am I misunderstanding?
Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #114 on: February 19, 2012, 08:38:29 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

The RCC Pope and the Ecumenical Patriarch ended the excommunications of one another in 1965.

I don't care if anybody likes that or not: it really happened.

Every shiny new copy of the Daily Roman Missal says that the RCC permits Orthodox to take Communion in their churches. When the door will be opened the other way, I don't know.

Shhhhhhhhh, someone is going to say that was merely symbolic and that not all the patriarchs agreed.  What I don't get was it was pretty much between the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Pope in the Vatican who were in the excommunication mess in 1054 ad. 
I asked this question not too long ago and said, but how, how would we really be able to tell "when" the excommunications are reversed if the first time they said it no one believed them.
Logged

username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #115 on: February 19, 2012, 08:41:47 PM »

From the joint declaration of Patriarch Athenagaros I and Pope Paul the VI

"B. They likewise regret and remove both from memory and from the midst of the Church the sentences of excommunication which followed these events, the memory of which has influenced actions up to our day and has hindered closer relations in charity; and they commit these excommunications to oblivion."

straight from the Vatican website
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/speeches/1965/documents/hf_p-vi_spe_19651207_common-declaration_en.html

So really, I take it this must be a pretty clear sign of what the Roman Catholic Church thinks about Eastern Orthodoxy.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #116 on: February 19, 2012, 09:13:21 PM »

I asked this question not too long ago and said, but how, how would we really be able to tell "when" the excommunications are reversed if the first time they said it no one believed them.

I'm not even convinced that the lifting was strictly necessary, since those who were excommunicated died a long time ago.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2012, 09:15:31 PM by Peter J » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #117 on: February 21, 2012, 11:02:19 AM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.

Yes. If you want to read his whole offensive post:

Quote
The OICWR crowd is a tiny but vocal minority resident mostly online at ByzCath. They are not representative of the countless good Eastern Catholics one finds in church on Sunday.

I would beg to differ that these malcontents do not display a toxic anti-Westernism. That is pretty much all they are about, save a tenuous and virtually meaningless communion with Rome.

Most dox. And they should, in the interest of honesty.

I just came across a blog-article called "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox". I haven't read it, but the title is a great way to respond to Fr. Steele: many people do actually understand that joining the Orthodox Church would require agreeing with Orthodoxy.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #118 on: February 21, 2012, 01:59:07 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.

Yes. If you want to read his whole offensive post:

Quote
The OICWR crowd is a tiny but vocal minority resident mostly online at ByzCath. They are not representative of the countless good Eastern Catholics one finds in church on Sunday.

I would beg to differ that these malcontents do not display a toxic anti-Westernism. That is pretty much all they are about, save a tenuous and virtually meaningless communion with Rome.

Most dox. And they should, in the interest of honesty.

I just came across a blog-article called "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox". I haven't read it, but the title is a great way to respond to Fr. Steele: many people do actually understand that joining the Orthodox Church would require agreeing with Orthodoxy.

A *very* interesting and well-written article!  I read it rather quickly and haven't really had time to absorb its full impact, but given that caveat (and the need to go back and re-read it), I'd say I'm impressed.  I'd venture to say that many here may find fault with it  Sad.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #119 on: February 21, 2012, 02:43:40 PM »

I just came across a blog-article called "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox". I haven't read it, but the title is a great way to respond to Fr. Steele: many people do actually understand that joining the Orthodox Church would require agreeing with Orthodoxy.

A *very* interesting and well-written article!  I read it rather quickly and haven't really had time to absorb its full impact, but given that caveat (and the need to go back and re-read it), I'd say I'm impressed.  I'd venture to say that many here may find fault with it  Sad.

I hadn't read it as of when I first mentioned it here, but I have now. I see now that the author meant "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" in a different way than I did: I meant it as I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to agree with Orthodoxy
whereas that article meant it as I love Orthodoxy more than the Orthodox do.

Nevertheless, I think it offers a fascinating look into RC thinking.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #120 on: February 21, 2012, 02:56:32 PM »

I just came across a blog-article called "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox". I haven't read it, but the title is a great way to respond to Fr. Steele: many people do actually understand that joining the Orthodox Church would require agreeing with Orthodoxy.

A *very* interesting and well-written article!  I read it rather quickly and haven't really had time to absorb its full impact, but given that caveat (and the need to go back and re-read it), I'd say I'm impressed.  I'd venture to say that many here may find fault with it  Sad.

I hadn't read it as of when I first mentioned it here, but I have now. I see now that the author meant "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" in a different way than I did: I meant it as I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to agree with Orthodoxy
whereas that article meant it as I love Orthodoxy more than the Orthodox do.

Nevertheless, I think it offers a fascinating look into RC thinking.
 

I'm not sure that I'd reduce his thinking to "I love Orthodoxy more than the Orthodox do", but that's neither here nor there.  I found his focus on Holy Orders fascinating and is not something I've come across before, at least not articulated in the same kind of way, that is.

It will be interesting to read comments about it from our Orthodox brethren here!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #121 on: February 21, 2012, 06:47:48 PM »

Nevertheless, I think it offers a fascinating look into RC thinking.

Well, its certainly 'RC'. The entire article is based on a thoroughly Western understanding of the 'indelible mark' of "Holy Orders"--one which is completely incompatible with the Orthodox understanding as enshrined in the canons of the first Seven Ecumenical Councils. Or in other words, this is another entry in the genre of 'we love the Orthodox Church--we just don't take its ecclesiology or self-understanding seriously.' If you loved your wife the way this author loves the Orthodox Church, you wouldn't be married very long.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #122 on: February 21, 2012, 08:10:04 PM »

As far as I'm concerned, it would be flippant and disrespectful to *any* faith to consider joining just to try it out.

I agree, but there are a lot of flippant people.

Just consider Fr. J Steele's (in)famous statement that "the OICWR crowd" should convert to Orthodoxy.

? acronym means what? Thanks! Smiley

Orthodox in communion with Rome, I think.

Yes. If you want to read his whole offensive post:

Quote
The OICWR crowd is a tiny but vocal minority resident mostly online at ByzCath. They are not representative of the countless good Eastern Catholics one finds in church on Sunday.

I would beg to differ that these malcontents do not display a toxic anti-Westernism. That is pretty much all they are about, save a tenuous and virtually meaningless communion with Rome.

Most dox. And they should, in the interest of honesty.

I just came across a blog-article called "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox". I haven't read it, but the title is a great way to respond to Fr. Steele: many people do actually understand that joining the Orthodox Church would require agreeing with Orthodoxy.
Very good article
Logged
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Posts: 4,306


« Reply #123 on: February 21, 2012, 08:12:44 PM »

Good to see you again, Wyatt.
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

Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. - Matt. 5:24
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #124 on: February 21, 2012, 09:17:20 PM »

Good to see you again, Wyatt.
Thanks. Good to see you too. Smiley
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #125 on: February 21, 2012, 09:52:22 PM »

I'd venture to say that many here may find fault with it  Sad.

Anything in particular you have in mind?
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #126 on: February 21, 2012, 10:11:06 PM »

Since we've started talking about the article itself, and not just the title, it seems worth mentioning that said article is (I believe) a follow-up to an earlier article Two Rights Declare a Wrong-on Appeals to Orthodoxy.

To make it worth-your-while to read this article, I think you need to excuse one little faux pas that he makes at the beginning: in the second paragraph he gives the impression that the he's going to refute the idea that "because other Christians apart from Catholics assert something about our faith, that something does not argue for the particular correctness of Catholicism", but he never does so.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Father H
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,576



« Reply #127 on: February 21, 2012, 11:16:28 PM »

Nevertheless, I think it offers a fascinating look into RC thinking.

Well, its certainly 'RC'. The entire article is based on a thoroughly Western understanding of the 'indelible mark' of "Holy Orders"--one which is completely incompatible with the Orthodox understanding as enshrined in the canons of the first Seven Ecumenical Councils. Or in other words, this is another entry in the genre of 'we love the Orthodox Church--we just don't take its ecclesiology or self-understanding seriously.' If you loved your wife the way this author loves the Orthodox Church, you wouldn't be married very long.

Yes, it certainly was not an "outreach" article to Orthodox. 
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #128 on: February 21, 2012, 11:24:10 PM »

Nevertheless, I think it offers a fascinating look into RC thinking.

Well, its certainly 'RC'. The entire article is based on a thoroughly Western understanding of the 'indelible mark' of "Holy Orders"--one which is completely incompatible with the Orthodox understanding as enshrined in the canons of the first Seven Ecumenical Councils. Or in other words, this is another entry in the genre of 'we love the Orthodox Church--we just don't take its ecclesiology or self-understanding seriously.' If you loved your wife the way this author loves the Orthodox Church, you wouldn't be married very long.

Yes, it certainly was not an "outreach" article to Orthodox. 

Depends on your understanding of "outreach".
Logged

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

Faith: None
Posts: 4,306


« Reply #129 on: February 21, 2012, 11:37:46 PM »

If you loved your wife the way this author loves the Orthodox Church, you wouldn't be married very long.

+1
« Last Edit: February 21, 2012, 11:38:27 PM by William » 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

Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. - Matt. 5:24
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #130 on: February 21, 2012, 11:59:30 PM »

If you loved your wife the way this author loves the Orthodox Church, you wouldn't be married very long.

What about just saying "I love you too much to be married to you"?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
LBK
Moderated
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,485


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #131 on: February 22, 2012, 12:13:45 AM »

Quote
"I love you too much to be married to you"

A truly ignorant, stupid and, in essence, meaningless statement. I've read the article in the blog, and the above statement fits it like a glove.
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,303


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #132 on: February 22, 2012, 11:59:17 AM »

Quote
"--one which is completely incompatible with the Orthodox understanding as enshrined in the canons of the first Seven Ecumenical Councils
Like that has ever stopped anyone from innovating....

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
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #133 on: February 22, 2012, 12:02:10 PM »

I'd venture to say that many here may find fault with it  Sad.

Anything in particular you have in mind?

Not really anything specific.  I was just referring to the fact of a Catholic, albeit an Eastern Catholic, critiquing, if that's the appropriate word, Orthodoxy.  See replies 127, 129, and 131 above.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #134 on: February 22, 2012, 12:04:30 PM »

Nevertheless, I think it offers a fascinating look into RC thinking.

Well, its certainly 'RC'. The entire article is based on a thoroughly Western understanding of the 'indelible mark' of "Holy Orders"--one which is completely incompatible with the Orthodox understanding as enshrined in the canons of the first Seven Ecumenical Councils. Or in other words, this is another entry in the genre of 'we love the Orthodox Church--we just don't take its ecclesiology or self-understanding seriously.' If you loved your wife the way this author loves the Orthodox Church, you wouldn't be married very long.

Yes, it certainly was not an "outreach" article to Orthodox. 

I'm not sure it was meant to be.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #135 on: February 22, 2012, 12:43:40 PM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #136 on: February 22, 2012, 12:55:29 PM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?

Good question.  As a (former?) Catholic, what's your take on it?

Most of the Catholics (especially those secure in their faith) I know don't really give Orthodoxy a second thought.  Many don't even give it a *first* thought. 
Logged

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

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,063



« Reply #137 on: February 22, 2012, 12:58:19 PM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?
Most of the Roman Catholics perhaps.  But Orthodoxy can be tempting for Greek Catholics especially if they have family in both.
Good question.  As a (former?) Catholic, what's your take on it?

Most of the Catholics (especially those secure in their faith) I know don't really give Orthodoxy a second thought.  Many don't even give it a *first* thought. 
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #138 on: February 22, 2012, 01:02:24 PM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?
Most of the Roman Catholics perhaps.  But Orthodoxy can be tempting for Greek Catholics especially if they have family in both.
Good question.  As a (former?) Catholic, what's your take on it?

Most of the Catholics (especially those secure in their faith) I know don't really give Orthodoxy a second thought.  Many don't even give it a *first* thought. 

 Huh Huh
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #139 on: February 22, 2012, 01:31:15 PM »

From my experience -- largely on the Catholic Answers Forum, but also my experience off-net -- I would say that, yes, those 2 articles are pretty typical of the Roman attitude towards Orthodoxy.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #140 on: February 22, 2012, 01:46:06 PM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?
Most of the Roman Catholics perhaps.  But Orthodoxy can be tempting for Greek Catholics especially if they have family in both.
Good question.  As a (former?) Catholic, what's your take on it?

Most of the Catholics (especially those secure in their faith) I know don't really give Orthodoxy a second thought.  Many don't even give it a *first* thought. 

Took me awhile, but I finally noticed your comment above mine, as though it was my comment  Roll Eyes.  I agree that it could be tempting for those Greek Eastern Catholics with Orthodox in their family--especially if they are insecure in *Catholic* part of their Eastern Catholicism.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #141 on: February 22, 2012, 02:32:39 PM »

Took me awhile,

Well, not as long as it took me.  Shocked I didn't get it until you explained it.
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #142 on: February 22, 2012, 02:36:33 PM »

Quote
"I love you too much to be married to you"

A truly ignorant, stupid and, in essence, meaningless statement. I've read the article in the blog, and the above statement fits it like a glove.
What about, I love my kid, I just don't agree with some of his decisions? You see, this argument by analogy thing is silly.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #143 on: February 22, 2012, 02:50:18 PM »

Quote
"I love you too much to be married to you"

A truly ignorant, stupid and, in essence, meaningless statement. I've read the article in the blog, and the above statement fits it like a glove.
What about, I love my kid, I just don't agree with some of his decisions? You see, this argument by analogy thing is silly.

+1
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #144 on: February 22, 2012, 02:56:28 PM »

Quote
"I love you too much to be married to you"

A truly ignorant, stupid and, in essence, meaningless statement. I've read the article in the blog, and the above statement fits it like a glove.
What about, I love my kid, I just don't agree with some of his decisions? You see, this argument by analogy thing is silly.

Since that would be an entirely reasonable (and commonplace) thing to say, and it's analogue, "I love the Orthodox Church, but I don't agree with some its decisions" would also be a reasonable thing to say, I don't see how you've demonstrated 'argument by analogy is silly' at all.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,975


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #145 on: February 22, 2012, 02:59:59 PM »

If you are looking to find something negative, then you will. I don't know that you possibly could survey all the RCC people and all the Orthodox people in the world and find out what they think of each other. Since the RCC is still engaging in talks in hopes a possible future 'reunion' with the Orthodox, there must be something to it. Or, you can think what you want.  Embarrassed
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/
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #146 on: February 22, 2012, 03:25:59 PM »

If you are looking to find something negative, then you will.

Reverend Ford: [reading] When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will. Abraham Lincoln?
Pollyanna Whittier: He was President.
Reverend Ford: Yes, I know.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #147 on: February 22, 2012, 03:29:07 PM »

Quote
"I love you too much to be married to you"

A truly ignorant, stupid and, in essence, meaningless statement. I've read the article in the blog, and the above statement fits it like a glove.
What about, I love my kid, I just don't agree with some of his decisions? You see, this argument by analogy thing is silly.

Since that would be an entirely reasonable (and commonplace) thing to say, and it's analogue, "I love the Orthodox Church, but I don't agree with some its decisions" would also be a reasonable thing to say, I don't see how you've demonstrated 'argument by analogy is silly' at all.

The analogy is strange when you use "wife". I had been thinking about changing it, in a slightly different way than Papist did: making it about a family rather than a wife. As in "I love the Jones family so much that I could never be a Jones."
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,975


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #148 on: February 22, 2012, 03:32:21 PM »

If you are looking to find something negative, then you will.

Reverend Ford: [reading] When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will. Abraham Lincoln?
Pollyanna Whittier: He was President.
Reverend Ford: Yes, I know.

What?

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #149 on: February 22, 2012, 03:42:06 PM »

If you are looking to find something negative, then you will.

Reverend Ford: [reading] When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will. Abraham Lincoln?
Pollyanna Whittier: He was President.
Reverend Ford: Yes, I know.

What?

 Huh

What, you don't like movies?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,975


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #150 on: February 22, 2012, 03:57:31 PM »

Sorry. Guess I missed it.  Smiley
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/
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #151 on: February 22, 2012, 04:04:05 PM »

Sorry. Guess I missed it.  Smiley

Well that's understandable -- it was 50 years ago after all.  Wink
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,439



« Reply #152 on: February 22, 2012, 04:04:43 PM »

Sorry. Guess I missed it.  Smiley

You are blessed among women!

Oddly though, if I wudda guessed anyone on this board had seen Pollyanna . .
Logged

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

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,439



« Reply #153 on: February 22, 2012, 04:06:46 PM »

Sorry. Guess I missed it.  Smiley

Well that's understandable -- it was 50 years ago after all.  Wink

Oh, you are a young fogey . . . I was going Pickford route. Sheesh, 90+ years?

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #154 on: February 22, 2012, 04:11:16 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).

Can an Orthodox be communed by an RC priest on their death bed if there is no EO one available?

No. Acceptance of RC communion means leaving the Orthodox Church.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #155 on: February 22, 2012, 04:20:21 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

The RCC Pope and the Ecumenical Patriarch ended the excommunications of one another in 1965.

I don't care if anybody likes that or not: it really happened.

Every shiny new copy of the Daily Roman Missal says that the RCC permits Orthodox to take Communion in their churches. When the door will be opened the other way, I don't know.

Except that the "Excommunications of 1054" never happened.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #156 on: February 22, 2012, 04:21:06 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

Rome wasn't on the diptychs in 1015 (and part of 1014) either. Does that mean that Rome's status is the same now as it was in 1015? (You can make RCs very very happy by saying yes.)

It's worse. Now with 85% more heresy.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #157 on: February 22, 2012, 04:21:17 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).

Can an Orthodox be communed by an RC priest on their death bed if there is no EO one available?

No. Acceptance of RC communion means leaving the Orthodox Church.

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

Btw, I've heard at least 2 Orthodox priests (one of them Antiochian, btw) say that it's perfectly alright for an RC priest to commune an Orthodox Christian on their deathbed with no OC priest available.  I'm sure I've read it in a couple places, too, but don't remember where.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2012, 04:23:09 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #158 on: February 22, 2012, 04:22:34 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

Rome wasn't on the diptychs in 1015 (and part of 1014) either. Does that mean that Rome's status is the same now as it was in 1015? (You can make RCs very very happy by saying yes.)

It's worse. Now with 85% more heresy.

Oh boy....here we go, again!!!  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #159 on: February 22, 2012, 04:28:22 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).

Can an Orthodox be communed by an RC priest on their death bed if there is no EO one available?

No. Acceptance of RC communion means leaving the Orthodox Church.

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

Btw, I've heard at least 2 Orthodox priests (one of them Antiochian, btw) say that it's perfectly alright for an RC priest to commune an Orthodox Christian on their deathbed with no OC priest available.  I'm sure I've read it in a couple places, too, but don't remember where.

Absolutely not. Membership in the Church continues into eternity.

The priests are wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #160 on: February 22, 2012, 04:30:05 PM »

From a Catholic POV, there are no barriers to intercommunion. From an Orthodox POV, however, Orthodox generally cannot (and would have no reason to) partake of Catholic sacraments, nor are Catholics permitted to partake of Orthodox Sacraments (the only exception I know being that Catholics can be communed by an Orthodox priest if they are near death).

Can an Orthodox be communed by an RC priest on their death bed if there is no EO one available?

No. Acceptance of RC communion means leaving the Orthodox Church.

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

Btw, I've heard at least 2 Orthodox priests (one of them Antiochian, btw) say that it's perfectly alright for an RC priest to commune an Orthodox Christian on their deathbed with no OC priest available.  I'm sure I've read it in a couple places, too, but don't remember where.

Absolutely not. Membership in the Church continues into eternity.

The priests are wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

Whatever.......
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #161 on: February 22, 2012, 04:33:50 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #162 on: February 22, 2012, 04:39:41 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #163 on: February 22, 2012, 05:10:01 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

No. That's why I included the caveat about disagreement over what constitutes the earthly manifestation of the One Church. For Orthodox Christians, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is the Orthodox Church, whether we are talking about here or in eternity. My point is that a Western "Catholic" (whether Roman Catholic or continuing Anglican Catholic, etc) should understand that reasoning--and know what answer they are going to get from Orthodox--even if they disagree with Orthodoxy's self-identification.


Quote
The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

I saw the smiley and understood you were trying to lighten a comment about death, but I still took it as expressive of your actual beliefs. (but I'm no expert at interpreting emoticons--feel free to consider me emoticon-challenged)

Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #164 on: February 22, 2012, 05:34:25 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

No. That's why I included the caveat about disagreement over what constitutes the earthly manifestation of the One Church. For Orthodox Christians, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is the Orthodox Church, whether we are talking about here or in eternity. My point is that a Western "Catholic" (whether Roman Catholic or continuing Anglican Catholic, etc) should understand that reasoning--and know what answer they are going to get from Orthodox--even if they disagree with Orthodoxy's self-identification.


Quote
The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

I saw the smiley and understood you were trying to lighten a comment about death, but I still took it as expressive of your actual beliefs. (but I'm no expert at interpreting emoticons--feel free to consider me emoticon-challenged)



Okay, I understand where you're coming from.  I don't agree with you, but I understand you p.o.v.

Just out of curiosity, other matters aside, if an Orthodox Christian is on his deathbed, there is no Orthodox priest available at all, death is imminent, and a Catholic priest *is* available to commune and anoint him, what happened to the Orthodox concept of oikonomia?

I'm wondering if one of you Orthodox asked your bishop about this what they would say.  And I'm just guessing that some bishops would say one thing, and some would say the opposite.

As for the smiley, and the comment preceding it, I did not mean it to be expressive of my actual beliefs.  However, I must add the caveat that I really *don't* know *what* happens after death.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #165 on: February 22, 2012, 05:42:13 PM »

Okay, I understand where you're coming from.  I don't agree with you, but I understand you p.o.v.

Well, obviously. If you agreed with me, you'd be Orthodox  Wink

Quote
Just out of curiosity, other matters aside, if an Orthodox Christian is on his deathbed, there is no Orthodox priest available at all, death is imminent, and a Catholic priest *is* available to commune and anoint him, what happened to the Orthodox concept of oikonomia?

I'm wondering if one of you Orthodox asked your bishop about this what they would say.  And I'm just guessing that some bishops would say one thing, and some would say the opposite.

I suspect you're right. I know the strict answer and it's what I heard from my bishop, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear that other bishops take an economic view of the matter.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,552



« Reply #166 on: February 22, 2012, 07:05:28 PM »

Quote
There are those on both sides of the Catholic/Orthodox divide who actually agree with the pope of Rome who notes that there is, of course, material schism but not formal or heretical schism between Orthodox and Catholics.    I am suggesting that we might discover that they have the right of it, which would render the material schism meaningless...both now and then.

EM, all the wistful musings in the world don't matter a hill of beans if the Orthodox diptychs exclude the hierarchy of Rome. This is the reality, and it is not random or accidental. Playing wordgames by saying things like "formal" and "material" schism is meaningless, just as being a little bit pregnant is.

Rome wasn't on the diptychs in 1015 (and part of 1014) either. Does that mean that Rome's status is the same now as it was in 1015? (You can make RCs very very happy by saying yes.)

It's worse. Now with 85% more heresy.

Sounds like New Coke.
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
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,552



« Reply #167 on: February 22, 2012, 07:34:25 PM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?

I think so. The assumption that most Catholics seem to run on is that refusal to go into communion with the Pope stems from pride, anger, resentment, bitterness, etc.. You will see many Catholics say this about both the Orthodox (sometimes with comically histrionic woe and sadness for the state of our separation; they will almost always follow such statements up with a counterbalancing statement like, "I hope for the day when we can all be one again," or "it must agonize Jesus to see these divisions within Christianity") and the Protestants (usually with a tone of superiority, as if they are condescending themselves to explain such a basic concept to the Protestants). It doesn't even seem to occur to many of them that the Orthodox disagree with the papacy because from our perspective, the popes have claimed more and more powers for themselves until we get to the papacy of the late middle ages (from which there is no true turning back). One rather intelligent and observant Orthodox poster I have corresponded with once compared the development of the papacy to the paradox of Theseus' Ship. I am inclined to agree.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2012, 07:50:30 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

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

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,439



« Reply #168 on: February 22, 2012, 08:37:32 PM »

If I tell most Catholics I am Orthodox, they are going to are probably going to show surprise that I am Jewish.

If I then say, no, Christian Orthodox, they will probably ask me when they can roll by the annual pangyrofest and car raffle.

At least in these parts.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #169 on: February 22, 2012, 09:30:59 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

No. That's why I included the caveat about disagreement over what constitutes the earthly manifestation of the One Church. For Orthodox Christians, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is the Orthodox Church, whether we are talking about here or in eternity. My point is that a Western "Catholic" (whether Roman Catholic or continuing Anglican Catholic, etc) should understand that reasoning--and know what answer they are going to get from Orthodox--even if they disagree with Orthodoxy's self-identification.


Quote
The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

I saw the smiley and understood you were trying to lighten a comment about death, but I still took it as expressive of your actual beliefs. (but I'm no expert at interpreting emoticons--feel free to consider me emoticon-challenged)

To be fair, J Michael's statement was just the reversal of something an Orthodox said recently: that Catholics can get to heaven, but in heaven everyone will be Orthodox not Catholic.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Father H
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,576



« Reply #170 on: February 23, 2012, 04:19:43 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

Actually there is a difference in ecclesiology here. 

The Vatican views the "Church on earth" as "militant" and "the Church in heaven" as triumpant.  Orthodoxy views the one Church in heaven and earth before the general resurrection as the Church militant, and the entire Church in heaven and earth after the general resurrection as the Church triumphant.  That is why the RCC needs two heads, and the Orthodox Church needs one.   
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #171 on: February 23, 2012, 04:47:05 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church?  

The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

Actually there is a difference in ecclesiology here.  

The Vatican views the "Church on earth" as "militant" and "the Church in heaven" as triumpant.  Orthodoxy views the one Church in heaven and earth before the general resurrection as the Church militant, and the entire Church in heaven and earth after the general resurrection as the Church triumphant.  That is why the RCC needs two heads, and the Orthodox Church needs one.  

At the risk of getting in over my head (yet again  Grin)----I'm not sure that the fact that the Catholic Church *used to* talk about 3 states of the ONE Church (most people no longer do, and they're not even specifically mentioned in the Catechism) is the reason why "the RCC needs two heads", as you say.  It doesn't need two heads.  The fact of the matter is that we have *one* head--Christ.  The pope is His visible representative on Earth, NOT the Head of the Church, who is.....Christ.  There is but One Church, and its head is Christ.  The Church Militant, Church Triumphant, and Church Suffering are not 3 Churches but 3 states of that One Church.

One could just as easily say that the OC has multiple heads, not all of whom always agree with each other--all the various  patriarchs or bishops who head national churches, etc.  If I were to claim that, you would say I'm wrong, and that you have but one head---Christ.

I'm not saying that there are no differences in ecclesiology between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, just that I think you're wrong about this.

Because I do not *know* (does *anybody*, really?) what happens after death, I'm going to speculate, like so many others far better than I, that in Heaven there will be no Catholics, no Orthodox, no Continuing Anglicans, no Jews, etc.--just Glorified souls.  And we'll all be getting along splendidly together  angel Wink!
« Last Edit: February 23, 2012, 04:52:34 PM by J Michael » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #172 on: February 23, 2012, 04:53:17 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

Actually there is a difference in ecclesiology here. 

The Vatican views the "Church on earth" as "militant" and "the Church in heaven" as triumpant.  Orthodoxy views the one Church in heaven and earth before the general resurrection as the Church militant, and the entire Church in heaven and earth after the general resurrection as the Church triumphant.  That is why the RCC needs two heads, and the Orthodox Church needs one.   

Father, I think you're reading too much into the terms "Church militant", "Church suffering", and "Church triumphant". To me, the main point of those terms is just that all 3 are one church.
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #173 on: February 23, 2012, 08:08:56 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

Actually there is a difference in ecclesiology here. 

The Vatican views the "Church on earth" as "militant" and "the Church in heaven" as triumpant.  Orthodoxy views the one Church in heaven and earth before the general resurrection as the Church militant, and the entire Church in heaven and earth after the general resurrection as the Church triumphant.  That is why the RCC needs two heads, and the Orthodox Church needs one.   
Actually, you guys have multiple heads, i.e. all the bishops.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #174 on: February 23, 2012, 09:21:57 PM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?

I think so. The assumption that most Catholics seem to run on is that refusal to go into communion with the Pope stems from pride, anger, resentment, bitterness, etc.. You will see many Catholics say this about both the Orthodox (sometimes with comically histrionic woe and sadness for the state of our separation; they will almost always follow such statements up with a counterbalancing statement like, "I hope for the day when we can all be one again," or "it must agonize Jesus to see these divisions within Christianity") and the Protestants (usually with a tone of superiority, as if they are condescending themselves to explain such a basic concept to the Protestants). It doesn't even seem to occur to many of them that the Orthodox disagree with the papacy because from our perspective, the popes have claimed more and more powers for themselves until we get to the papacy of the late middle ages (from which there is no true turning back). One rather intelligent and observant Orthodox poster I have corresponded with once compared the development of the papacy to the paradox of Theseus' Ship. I am inclined to agree.

I have to be honest with you: I really don't know who Theseus was.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Father H
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,576



« Reply #175 on: February 23, 2012, 09:45:15 PM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

Actually there is a difference in ecclesiology here. 

The Vatican views the "Church on earth" as "militant" and "the Church in heaven" as triumpant.  Orthodoxy views the one Church in heaven and earth before the general resurrection as the Church militant, and the entire Church in heaven and earth after the general resurrection as the Church triumphant.  That is why the RCC needs two heads, and the Orthodox Church needs one.   
Actually, you guys have multiple heads, i.e. all the bishops.

That's nonsense and a complete misrepresentation of Orthodox Theology.  There is only one Great Hierarch (Megas Archiereus) of the Church.  The rest are local Archieries under Him, and all brethren under a single Head.  They have local headship over their dioceses.  In Synod the one who sits as protos is bishop of the See first in honor in the eparchia for the provincial synod, or the dioikesis for the patriarchal synod.     
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #176 on: February 24, 2012, 11:37:56 AM »

I guess if someone were on their deathbed they'd be leaving the Orthodox Church anyway  Grin.

?
There's one Church. One Church in Heaven, one on earth and they are the same thing. I thought that whatever disputes there may be about where that One Church is on earth, this was an understanding Western "Catholics" shared with Orthodoxy?

Well, if we "Catholics" (Western and Eastern) share this understanding with the OC about One Church in Heaven, one on earth, etc., does that not make us all part of the same One Church? 

The first part of my comment that generated your "?", was a joke.  Did you see the smiley  Grin?

Actually there is a difference in ecclesiology here. 

The Vatican views the "Church on earth" as "militant" and "the Church in heaven" as triumpant.  Orthodoxy views the one Church in heaven and earth before the general resurrection as the Church militant, and the entire Church in heaven and earth after the general resurrection as the Church triumphant.  That is why the RCC needs two heads, and the Orthodox Church needs one.   
Actually, you guys have multiple heads, i.e. all the bishops.

That's nonsense and a complete misrepresentation of Orthodox Theology.  There is only one Great Hierarch (Megas Archiereus) of the Church.  The rest are local Archieries under Him, and all brethren under a single Head.  They have local headship over their dioceses.  In Synod the one who sits as protos is bishop of the See first in honor in the eparchia for the provincial synod, or the dioikesis for the patriarchal synod.     

See what I mean??  From my reply #171 above: "One could just as easily say that the OC has multiple heads, not all of whom always agree with each other--all the various  patriarchs or bishops who head national churches, etc.  If I were to claim that, you would say I'm wrong, and that you have but one head---Christ."  No more nonsensical and no more of a misrepresentation of Orthodox theology than your comments in your post above claiming the Catholic Church needs 2 heads.



(Now, Fahder, does this post qualify for the appellation of "strange", "semi-strange", or "just plain weird"  Grin Cheesy?)
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 11:47:42 AM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #177 on: February 24, 2012, 11:38:49 AM »

Honestly, I'm a tad disappointed that the title of "I love the Orthodox too much to be Orthodox" didn't mean what I had in mind, i.e. "I'm not going to become Orthodox unless I first come to fully agree with Orthodoxy" -- which was, after all, the reason I brought it up.

But to try to tie it to what we were discussing before, I pose this question: is the attitude toward Orthodoxy expressed in that article (and the other one for that matter) typical of Catholics?

I think so. The assumption that most Catholics seem to run on is that refusal to go into communion with the Pope stems from pride, anger, resentment, bitterness, etc.. You will see many Catholics say this about both the Orthodox (sometimes with comically histrionic woe and sadness for the state of our separation; they will almost always follow such statements up with a counterbalancing statement like, "I hope for the day when we can all be one again," or "it must agonize Jesus to see these divisions within Christianity") and the Protestants (usually with a tone of superiority, as if they are condescending themselves to explain such a basic concept to the Protestants). It doesn't even seem to occur to many of them that the Orthodox disagree with the papacy because from our perspective, the popes have claimed more and more powers for themselves until we get to the papacy of the late middle ages (from which there is no true turning back). One rather intelligent and observant Orthodox poster I have corresponded with once compared the development of the papacy to the paradox of Theseus' Ship. I am inclined to agree.

I have to be honest with you: I really don't know who Theseus was.

Theseus--a character from Greek mythology.  See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theseus
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #178 on: February 24, 2012, 12:28:55 PM »

See what I mean??  From my reply #171 above: "One could just as easily say that the OC has multiple heads, not all of whom always agree with each other--all the various  patriarchs or bishops who head national churches, etc.  If I were to claim that, you would say I'm wrong, and that you have but one head---Christ."  No more nonsensical and no more of a misrepresentation of Orthodox theology than your comments in your post above claiming the Catholic Church needs 2 heads.

Genuine question: Is it not the Roman Catholic position that the Pope is the head of the Church (for example)?
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #179 on: February 24, 2012, 12:48:34 PM »

See what I mean??  From my reply #171 above: "One could just as easily say that the OC has multiple heads, not all of whom always agree with each other--all the various  patriarchs or bishops who head national churches, etc.  If I were to claim that, you would say I'm wrong, and that you have but one head---Christ."  No more nonsensical and no more of a misrepresentation of Orthodox theology than your comments in your post above claiming the Catholic Church needs 2 heads.

Genuine question: Is it not the Roman Catholic position that the Pope is the head of the Church (for example)?

A common misunderstanding, I'm afraid.  The Pope is the head of the Church on earth.  The ultimate and absolute Head of the Church, over and above and absolutely superior to all humans,  is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.  Christ the King.  Christ the Lord.  Christ is our Head, the Pope is His chief representative here on earth.

From the article you linked: "The title pope, once used with far greater latitude (see below, section V), is at present employed solely to denote the Bishop of Rome, who, in virtue of his position as successor of St. Peter, is the chief pastor of the whole Church, the Vicar of Christ upon earth.".

From dictionary.com, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vicar: vicar--"a person who acts in place of another; substitute.

a person who is authorized to perform the functions of another; deputy: God's vicar on earth.

Origin:
1250–1300; Middle English  < Anglo-French vicare; Old French vicaire  < Latin vicārius  a substitute, noun use of adj.; see vicarious
"
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 12:51:45 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #180 on: February 24, 2012, 12:53:04 PM »

A common misunderstanding, I'm afraid.  The Pope is the head of the Church on earth.  The ultimate and absolute Head of the Church is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Okay, but that's the point FrHLL was making--Rome has 'two heads' - one for the Church on earth and one overall. This actually is different from Orthodoxy where no one is the 'head of the Church' (with or without the caveat of 'on earth') except Christ.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #181 on: February 24, 2012, 01:03:24 PM »

Genuine question: Is it not the Roman Catholic position that the Pope is the head of the Church (for example)?

The Catholic Encyclopedia, in the article you linked to, says

Quote
The proof that Christ constituted St. Peter head of His Church is found in the two famous Petrine texts, Matthew 16:17-19, and John 21:15-17.

But if there's one thing I've learned in all my years of studying and discussing the Catholic Encyclopedia it's this: don't pay too much attention to the Catholic Encyclopedia.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #182 on: February 24, 2012, 01:04:42 PM »

A common misunderstanding, I'm afraid.  The Pope is the head of the Church on earth.  The ultimate and absolute Head of the Church is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Okay, but that's the point FrHLL was making--Rome has 'two heads' - one for the Church on earth and one overall. This actually is different from Orthodoxy where no one is the 'head of the Church' (with or without the caveat of 'on earth') except Christ.

There can only be one Head.  That is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

If you want to discuss the differences in the roles of popes, patriarchs, and bishops as they've evolved over the centuries in both our Churches, I think that's a different discussion.  The Pope is only head of the Church in the sense of being Christ's vicar, His representative here in human form.  He is **NOT** the Head of the Church.  I'm not sure why that is difficult to understand.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church, #782: "The People of God is marked by characteristics that clearly distinguish it from all other religious, ethnic, political, or cultural groups found in history:

- It is the People of God: God is not the property of any one people. But he acquired a people for himself from those who previously were not a people: "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation."202

- One becomes a member of this people not by a physical birth, but by being "born anew," a birth "of water and the Spirit,"203 that is, by faith in Christ, and Baptism.

- This People has for its Head Jesus the Christ (the anointed, the Messiah). Because the same anointing, the Holy Spirit, flows from the head into the body, this is "the messianic people."

- "The status of this people is that of the dignity and freedom of the sons of God, in whose hearts the Holy Spirit dwells as in a temple."

- "Its law is the new commandment to love as Christ loved us."204 This is the "new" law of the Holy Spirit.205

- Its mission is to be salt of the earth and light of the world.206 This people is "a most sure seed of unity, hope, and salvation for the whole human race."

- Its destiny, finally, "is the Kingdom of God which has been begun by God himself on earth and which must be further extended until it has been brought to perfection by him at the end of time."207
"

And, #792: "Christ "is the head of the body, the Church."225 He is the principle of creation and redemption. Raised to the Father's glory, "in everything he [is] preeminent,"226 especially in the Church, through whom he extends his reign over all things."

And, #807: "The Church is this Body of which Christ is the head: she lives from him, in him, and for him; he lives with her and in her."

And, #947: "Since all the faithful form one body, the good of each is communicated to the others. . . . We must therefore believe that there exists a communion of goods in the Church. But the most important member is Christ, since he is the head. . . . Therefore, the riches of Christ are communicated to all the members, through the sacraments."480 "As this Church is governed by one and the same Spirit, all the goods she has received necessarily become a common fund."

And, #1698: "The first and last point of reference of this catechesis will always be Jesus Christ himself, who is "the way, and the truth, and the life."24 It is by looking to him in faith that Christ's faithful can hope that he himself fulfills his promises in them, and that, by loving him with the same love with which he has loved them, they may perform works in keeping with their dignity:

    I ask you to consider that our Lord Jesus Christ is your true head, and that you are one of his members. He belongs to you as the head belongs to its members; all that is his is yours: his spirit, his heart, his body and soul, and all his faculties. You must make use of all these as of your own, to serve, praise, love, and glorify God. You belong to him, as members belong to their head. And so he longs for you to use all that is in you, as if it were his own, for the service and glory of the Father."25


    For to me, to live is Christ.26

Hope that helps  Wink Wink!
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 01:22:58 PM by J Michael » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #183 on: February 24, 2012, 01:22:57 PM »

The Pope is only head of the Church in the sense of being Christ's vicar, His representative here in human form.  He is **NOT** the Head of the Church.  I'm not sure why that is difficult to understand.

I think a part of the problem is that most people don't understand imprimaturs. A typical conversation goes something like this ...


Orthodox poster: Aha! The Catholic Encyclopedia says X!
Catholic poster: True, but that isn't official Catholic teaching.
Orthodox poster: But X has to be the official Catholic teaching. The  Catholic Encyclopedia says so!
Catholic poster: Huh?
Orthodox poster: The Catholic Encyclopedia is official Catholic teaching. It has an imprimatur!
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #184 on: February 24, 2012, 01:33:43 PM »

The Pope is only head of the Church in the sense of being Christ's vicar, His representative here in human form.  He is **NOT** the Head of the Church.  I'm not sure why that is difficult to understand.

I think a part of the problem is that most people don't understand imprimaturs. A typical conversation goes something like this ...


Orthodox poster: Aha! The Catholic Encyclopedia says X!
Catholic poster: True, but that isn't official Catholic teaching.
Orthodox poster: But X has to be the official Catholic teaching. The  Catholic Encyclopedia says so!
Catholic poster: Huh?
Orthodox poster: The Catholic Encyclopedia is official Catholic teaching. It has an imprimatur!

While the Catholic Encyclopedia has an enormous wealth of information and can be highly useful, for discussions like this I think I'd much prefer the authoritative Catechism of the Catholic Church.

I believe there have been other discussions on this forum about just what imprimaturs are and are not.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #185 on: February 24, 2012, 01:45:57 PM »

A common misunderstanding, I'm afraid.  The Pope is the head of the Church on earth.  The ultimate and absolute Head of the Church is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Okay, but that's the point FrHLL was making--Rome has 'two heads' - one for the Church on earth and one overall. This actually is different from Orthodoxy where no one is the 'head of the Church' (with or without the caveat of 'on earth') except Christ.

There can only be one Head.  That is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

If you want to discuss the differences in the roles of popes, patriarchs, and bishops as they've evolved over the centuries in both our Churches, I think that's a different discussion.  The Pope is only head of the Church in the sense of being Christ's vicar, His representative here in human form.  He is **NOT** the Head of the Church.  I'm not sure why that is difficult to understand.

Uh. Because you just *said* he *is* the head of the Church on earth.

I'm well aware that the Catholic Encyclopedia is not definitive. That's why I started by asking the question and referencing the Catholic Encylopedia as an 'example' of RC's saying the Pope as the head of the Church rather than as a proof of anything. I then responded to *your* post without reference to the Encyclopedia.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,032


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


« Reply #186 on: February 24, 2012, 01:59:16 PM »

A common misunderstanding, I'm afraid.  The Pope is the head of the Church on earth.  The ultimate and absolute Head of the Church is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Okay, but that's the point FrHLL was making--Rome has 'two heads' - one for the Church on earth and one overall. This actually is different from Orthodoxy where no one is the 'head of the Church' (with or without the caveat of 'on earth') except Christ.

There can only be one Head.  That is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

If you want to discuss the differences in the roles of popes, patriarchs, and bishops as they've evolved over the centuries in both our Churches, I think that's a different discussion.  The Pope is only head of the Church in the sense of being Christ's vicar, His representative here in human form.  He is **NOT** the Head of the Church.  I'm not sure why that is difficult to understand.

Uh. Because you just *said* he *is* the head of the Church on earth.

I'm well aware that the Catholic Encyclopedia is not definitive. That's why I started by asking the question and referencing the Catholic Encylopedia as an 'example' of RC's saying the Pope as the head of the Church rather than as a proof of anything. I then responded to *your* post without reference to the Encyclopedia.

You, amongst others, *appear* to misunderstand that by "head of the Church on earth", what is meant is that the Pope is the representative of Christ, the chief ("head") pastor.  Christ is and always has been the Head of the Church.  Notice my use of upper case and lower case "h" in this discussion.  Sort of analogous to "O"rthodox and "o"rthodox.  I think the CCC is pretty clear and unequivocal on just who the Head of the Church is.  I don't think I can add anything to that.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #187 on: February 24, 2012, 02:05:08 PM »

While the Catholic Encyclopedia has an enormous wealth of information and can be highly useful, for discussions like this I think I'd much prefer the authoritative Catechism of the Catholic Church.

That's another thing about discussions: preferences.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,975


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #188 on: February 24, 2012, 02:14:22 PM »

A common misunderstanding, I'm afraid.  The Pope is the head of the Church on earth.  The ultimate and absolute Head of the Church is Christ Himself.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Okay, but that's the point FrHLL was making--Rome has 'two heads' - one for the Church on earth and one overall. This actually is different from Orthodoxy where no one is the 'hea