A day that shall live in infamy...

[Silouan]

Today marks the date Patriarch Athenagoras lifted the anathemas against Rome.  Let us all offere prayers for the sick Patriarchate of Constantinople and hope she doesn't once again sell out her Orthodoxy. 

[Deacon Lance]

Eternal memory to Pope Paul IV and Patriarch Athenagoras.

[sdcheung]

Lord Have Mercy.

Ever since Athenagoras, there has been a long line of sell outs.

[sdcheung]

Eternal memory to Pope Paul IV and Patriarch Athenagoras.

yes..of Sad memory, or was that of poor memory

[GiC]

While this is most certainly a day treachery that will forever live in infamy, that act of Brotherly Love between His All-Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras and His Holiness Pope Paul IV is a bright spot and joyous event in the dark history of this Day.

May the fulfillment of their hopes and dreams when they embraced in Brotherly Love soon come to pass.

[sdcheung]

<----- I for one can live without the West

While this is most certainly a day treachery that will forever live in infamy, that act of Brotherly Love between His All-Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras and His Holiness Pope Paul IV is a bright spot and joyous event in the dark history of this Day.

May the fulfillment of their hopes and dreams when they embraced in Brotherly Love soon come to pass.

[GiC]

<----- I for one can live without the West

Oh, I could live without them, but as Christians we should desire to see all return to the fold of the Church, and the only way that will happen with the overwhelming majority of the latins is if there is reunion between east and west.

[Silouan]

There is a vast difference between two religious leaders dialouging to encourage their flocks living in multi-cultural situations to live amicably with eachother (which is very good!) and attemping to proclaim a false unity (which isn't good!).  Now if Pope Paul VI had said he recants the filioque, wants to find a way restore Roman primacy to what it was in the early church and improve the diasterious situation that Vatican II was causing THAT would have been good.  Instead we have a meaningless gesture that did nothing to improve relations with the Vatican but scandalized countless faithful and clergy in the Orthodox Church. ÂÂ

I think an example of "good ecumenism" is the current dialouges between the MP and the ROCOR - nothing is being rushed or forced (its been what almost 15 years since the breakup of the USSR?).  The ROCOR has made its demands and won't compromise on the important matters - glorifcation of the new martyrs including the royal martyrs, renouncing "Sergianism" and withdrawl from the ecumenical movement.  God willing all this will happen (and much of it already has) and TRUE communion between the seperated parts of the Russian Church can happen. ÂÂ

[GiC]

There is a vast difference between two religious leaders dialouging to encourage their flocks living in multi-cultural situations to live amicably with eachother (which is very good!) and attemping to proclaim a false unity (which isn't good!).  Now if Pope Paul VI had said he recants the filioque, wants to find a way restore Roman primacy to what it was in the early church and improve the diasterious situation that Vatican II was causing THAT would have been good.  Instead we have a meaningless gesture that did nothing to improve relations with the Vatican but scandalized countless faithful and clergy in the Orthodox Church. ÂÂ

The filioque has essentially been dealt with, as the latins have essentially recanted of their heretical statements and have redefined the filioque to mean that the Holy Spirit proceedes from the Father and the Son in time, but proceedes from the Father alone in Eternity, which is perfectly Orthodox. As far as papal authority, the recognition of Constantinople as Rome's equal, as decreed in the Canons, would esentially solve the problem, for he would no longer be the sole head of the Church. Of course, he can continue acting in the way he does within his Jurisdiction in the West, which is his Patriarchal right, so there won't be any noticable changes on the administrative levels in either the east or the west. Concerning Vatican II, I really fail to see the problem, it seemed to solve far more problems in east-west relations than it created.

The greatest problems are cultural, you cannot just ignore the last 1000 years. But hopefully the Oecumenical Movement will be able to address those with time, and as our two Churches become more and more liberal the difficulities will decrease.

[Anastasios]

Dear GisC,

I don't see where the Latins have recanted their heretical understanding of the filioque.ÂÂ  Certainly not in the "Clarification" of 1995, which was an ambigous adventure in ecumenistispeak which doesn't hold any water.ÂÂ  Comparing that document with what the Orthodox Church synodically defined in 1285 at Blachernae, one understands that the Latins are still very much in heresy.

Don't get me wrong, I think that document was a good first step, but it did not resolve the issue.

Anastasios

[Silouan]

GiC, have you ever been a member of modern RC parish that "lives in the spirit of Vatican II"?  Converting to Orthodoxy in those parishes will not happen by simple modifaction of Papal authority and the creed. 

[emmanuelmelo]

What can I say Silouan?  You are right on the mark.  What does the Filioque matter when you have "politically correct" Masses that don't use "masculine language" to address The Trinity, when you have Holy Communion treated with Gross disrespect, and priests who don't believe in the existence of the Devil.

[drewmeister2]

I will also add that just because the Pope seems to have changed the teachings on the Filioque doesn't make it official.  Not every word that comes out of the Pope's mouth is infallible .  Essentially, the Filioque could only truly be changed by a Churchwide council, not by some modernist pope saying something.  I say this because even though it appears the RCC has changed its belief on the filioque because of what past popes have said, the pope after Benedict XVI could easily come in and fully support the heretical version of the filioque. 

[GiC]

I don't see where the Latins have recanted their heretical understanding of the filioque.ÂÂ  Certainly not in the "Clarification" of 1995, which was an ambigous adventure in ecumenistispeak which doesn't hold any water.ÂÂ  Comparing that document with what the Orthodox Church synodically defined in 1285 at Blachernae, one understands that the Latins are still very much in heresy.

Don't get me wrong, I think that document was a good first step, but it did not resolve the issue.

The inherent problem with the filioque is that it either it leads to the destruction of the hypostasis of the son by absorbing it into the father or it causes the Father and the Son to both be the source of the Spirit which is ditheism. That the Latins confess the Distinctness of the Father and the Son in the Trinity is clear from their Confessions of Faith, all that remains is that the confess the father alone as the source of the Trinity and all creation. Yet the Latins never contested this point, the problem lays in the fact that the Latin verb used, 'procedit' has a property of motion while the original Greek verb 'εκπορευόμενον' has the property of origin. The real problem is linguistic, of course the solution is for the Latins to say the Creed in Greek to avoid the Confusion, or perhaps find a different verb than 'procedit,' though the former would be more percise and preferable. But in any case, they withdrew the anathemas from the Fourth Lateran Council, so there is really no theological issue here to divide us.

GiC, have you ever been a member of modern RC parish that "lives in the spirit of Vatican II"?ÂÂ  Converting to Orthodoxy in those parishes will not happen by simple modifaction of Papal authority and the creed.ÂÂ  

I am not nor have I ever been a member of the Church of Rome. However, if we can be in communion with the so-called 'western rite orthodox churches,' it's a relatively small step to be in communion with these Latin churches.

What can I say Silouan?ÂÂ  You are right on the mark.ÂÂ  What does the Filioque matter when you have "politically correct" Masses that don't use "masculine language" to address The Trinity, when you have Holy Communion treated with Gross disrespect, and priests who don't believe in the existence of the Devil.

And this prevents the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Patriarch of Rome from being in Communion how? Communion would ultimately be between those two persons, thus it is individual names that are read in the dyptics of the Church, not synods or ecclesiastical bodies, everyone else falls into communion by connection to the persons who are in communion with each other...the point being that it doesn't have to mean immediate agreement at the grass roots level.

[Silouan]

I am not nor have I ever been a member of the Church of Rome. However, if we can be in communion with the so-called 'western rite orthodox churches,' it's a relatively small step to be in communion with these Latin churches.

By this you show your complete ignorance of the situation.ÂÂ  An Orthodox mindset simply doesn't exist at the average Catholic parish anymore.  Extreme liturgical minimalism is the norm, flippancy towards confession and communion (far worse the the situation in the GOA even) are the norm.  A lot of American Catholic parishes are only a few steps behind the local megachurch in how secularized they have become.  The real first step in any re-union attemps needs to be the Vatican bringing the RCC back under control - getting rid of new age spirituality, litrugical anarchy and out of control secularism.  Once you get to that point a union is conceivable since the average RC will have a mindset somewhat similar to Orthodoxy.   

[Meekle]

By this you show your complete ignorance of the situation.  An Orthodox mindset simply doesn't exist at the average Catholic parish anymore.  Extreme liturgical minimalism is the norm, flippancy towards confession and communion (far worse the the situation in the GOA even) are the norm.  A lot of American Catholic parishes are only a few steps behind the local megachurch in how secularized they have become.  The real first step in any re-union attemps needs to be the Vatican bringing the RCC back under control - getting rid of new age spirituality, litrugical anarchy and out of control secularism.  Once you get to that point a union is conceivable since the average RC will have a mindset somewhat similar to Orthodoxy.  ÃƒÆ’‚Â

So true, but I hope their mindset doesn't escalate to this: http://pressurecooker.phil.cmu.edu/Jesus/buddy.jpg

[Timos]

I don't like these horrible Post-Vatican II inovations either...but what do we say to Catholics who argue that these changes in the Mass make it more like the liturgies of the Early Church, simple, no incense or iconogeaphic art form (icons, statues), not too much chanting??

And why would we want to go back to the days of the early church They were in much different circumstances than we are in.The church as a whole was not developed as it was in the year 200 AD, 300 AD, 2000AD. IMHO, this idea of "returning to the Early Church's worship" is very protestant way of thinking.

[GiC]

So true, but I hope their mindset doesn't escalate to this: http://pressurecooker.phil.cmu.edu/Jesus/buddy.jpg

Hey, dont knock Buddy Jesus...one of our friends here at Holy Cross has a couple of them and seems to be well on his way to a collection

[Meekle]

Hey, dont knock Buddy Jesus...one of our friends here at Holy Cross has a couple of them and seems to be well on his way to a collection

Haha, one innovation in Catholic practice I would welcome is this: http://www.freakingnews.com/entries/10000/10448cIKH_w.jpg
I laugh every time I see it, is classicÂÂ  

[Elisha]

Haha, one innovation in Catholic practice I would welcome is this: http://www.freakingnews.com/entries/10000/10448cIKH_w.jpg
I laugh every time I see it, is classicÂÂ  

linky no worky

[Meekle]

linky no worky

Hmm you're right... try cutting and pasting url.

[ozgeorge]

Hey, dont knock Buddy Jesus...one of our friends here at Holy Cross has a couple of them and seems to be well on his way to a collection

I wonder if an Icon of "Buddy Jesus" will eventually replace the Pantocrator on the interior of the domes on Orthodox Churches? Can you picture it?

[Timos]

linky no worky

I'm ugessing thats suposed to be an Eastern Euorpean accent? lol

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Religious Topics (Moderator: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)) > Topic: A day that shall live in infamy...