www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West HOCNA

Chill, dude.


I like my O, H, C, and A Church.

LatinTrad

---------

I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Bob,

The EP does not concelebrate with the Metropolitan of the OCA nor is the OCA given a seat at Pan-Orthodox Synods, either one would give tacit recogntion to the OCA's autocephaly which the EP does not recognize. The EP considers the OCA a metropolia of the MP, fully canonical and in communion with it self, but not autocephalous and the EP isn't going to do anything that would imply otherwise.

I never stated that the OCA was considered un-Orthodox, or out of commuion with the EP, or that it is not a member of SCOBA or that jurisdictions under the EP don't concelebrate with the OCA. But the EP is never going to do anything that would give recognition to the OCA's autocephaly becasue then it might have to grant it to the GOA and that would effectively end the EP financially. I do not rejoice at the inconsistencies that exist within the Orthodox Church, nor those that exist within the Catholic Church, but one must recognize they exist.

In Christ,
Subdeacon Lance

Dear Qathuliqa Mor Ephrem,

Touche, Man, touche . . .

Now I think I can appreciate a bit of what MsGuided sees in you!

Alex

Posted by Mor Ephrem addressed to Latin Trad:

"When you have time, I would appreciate it if you would answer my question in the other thread about the violence done to the Sacraments when celebrated in the Orthodox Church, since it is out of communion with Rome. I don't mean to push the issue, but I really do want to know what you mean."


Dear Latin Trad,

I am also interested in learning what you meant by your comment cited by Mor Ephrem. It was in the thread on Graceless Heretics in Forum 2, as I recall.

Thanks!

Steve

Dear Lance,

You are an awesome Subdeacon. I can't imagine what you'd like as a Deacon.

And as a Priest?

I don't want to think about it!

I bow to your knowledge, Sir!

(You're not Ukrainian, are you? )

Alex

Dear LatinTrad,

Yup, I'm on that band wagon too.

What did you mean?

Alex

LatinTrad writes:

[I like my O, H, C, and A Church. ]

So do I. That's why I'm an Orthodox Catholic

[I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.]

So do I. And, once again, that's why I'm an Orthodox Catholic.

Lance writes:

[I never stated that the OCA was considered un-Orthodox, or out of commuion with the EP, or that it is not a member of SCOBA or that jurisdictions under the EP don't concelebrate with the OCA.]

No, but what you did do is try and back up a claim that separate Liturgies, and Altars are set up on occasions where the OCA is present in Russia because certain other Orthodox Hierachs refuse to concelebrate with them.

[But the EP is never going to do anything that would give recognition to the OCA's autocephaly becasue then it might have to grant it to the GOA and that would effectively end the EP financially.]

True. Except if the EP recognized the autocephally of the OCA, according to the Canons he would not be able to grant a dual autocepahlly to the GOA. Two separate canonical autocephallous Orthodox Churches cannot exist side by side within the same territory. If he recognized the autocephally of the OCA he would, according to the Canons, have to withdraw from the U.S. and thus goes his cash cow. The only thing that is keeping him alive as long as he remains in Turkey.

[The EP does not concelebrate with the Metropolitan of the OCA nor is the OCA given a seat at Pan-Orthodox Synods, either one would give tacit recogntion to the OCA's autocephaly which the EP does not recogniize.]

But as I have already proven... and you yourself state, he does not stop the Hierachal Bishops under him from concelebrating. What does all this have to do with the claim that separate Liturgies and Altars have to be set up by the MP because of those who refuse to concelebrate with the OCA? If they are not Hierachs of the EP, then who are they? And where is the proof? I have already given three separate incidents to prove that claim false. Which was the only issue I was addressing in my response.

OrthoMan

Dear Steve, Alex, and Phil,


You are most justified in your request. Not on this thread though.

I'll start another thread tonight.

God bless all!

LatinTrad

LatinTrad writes:

[I like my O, H, C, and A Church. ]

So do I. That's why I'm an Orthodox Catholic

[I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.]

So do I. And, once again, that's why I'm an Orthodox Catholic.

Lance writes:

[I never stated that the OCA was considered un-Orthodox, or out of commuion with the EP, or that it is not a member of SCOBA or that jurisdictions under the EP don't concelebrate with the OCA.]

No, but what you did do is try and back up a claim that separate Liturgies, and Altars are set up on occasions where the OCA is present in Russia because certain other Orthodox Hierachs refuse to concelebrate with them.

[But the EP is never going to do anything that would give recognition to the OCA's autocephaly becasue then it might have to grant it to the GOA and that would effectively end the EP financially.]

True. Except if the EP recognized the autocephally of the OCA, according to the Canons he would not be able to grant a dual autocepahlly to the GOA. Two separate canonical autocephallous Orthodox Churches cannot exist side by side within the same territority. If he recognized the autocephally of the OCA he would, according to the Canons have to withdraw from the U.S. and thus goes his cash cow. The only thing that is keeping him alive as long as he remains in Turkey.

[The EP does not concelebrate with the Metropolitan of the OCA nor is the OCA given a seat at Pan-Orthodox Synods, either one would give tacit recogntion to the OCA's autocephaly which the EP does not recogniize.]

But as I have already proven... and you yourself state, he does not stop the Hierachal Bishops under him from concelebrating. What does all this have to do with the claim that separate Liturgies and Altars have to be set up by the MP because of those who refuse to concelebrate with the OCA? If they are not Hierachs of the EP then who are they? And where is the proof? I have already given three separate incidents to prove that claim false. Which was the only issue I was addressing in my response.

OrthoMan

Dear Alex,

I try my best, and after that, she is still foolish enough to keep me.

Thanks to you and Steve for the support about the sacramental question. I think the discussion will be interesting.

I shall have to do some digging to come up with records of specific occasions when Moscow has had to schedule parallel celebrations of the Divine Liturgy to accommodate both the "OCA" and those who will not serve with the "OCA". But it has happened, most certainly. I did not assert that it has always happened. If Anastasios wishes me to agree that Orthodox ecclesiology is often inconsistent, I shall do so! Incognitus

But of course! Catholics use it the right way. Orthodox use it the wrong way. Very simple, ness pah? :p

But seriously...I have a really hard time with that "primacy of honor" stuff. AFAIK, it doesn't come from either Scripture or the Fathers. It comes from Byzantine imperial court politics.

When Scripture talks about primacy and authority (e.g. in Isaiah 22), it talks about real jurisdiction with real governing authority--not some toothless, meaningless "primacy of honor." God's word doesn't return to Him void; He's not into play-acting or make-pretend or mere ceremony!

And "first among equals" is a recipe for conflict, if not chaos. There's no final arbiter, no way to resolve intractable disputes at the highest level. All of the Scriptural and patristic evidence, IMHO, goes to show that Our Lord did not intend His Church to lack a final arbiter for resolving tough issues.

Over at Greg Krehbiel's board (www.crowhill.net--click [crowhill.net--click] on the Theological forum) there's a thread demonstrating papal jurisdictional primacy from Scriptural evidence alone. It's quite a lot to wade through but worth it, IMHO.

Blessings,

ZT

P.S. Anastasios--I apologize for jumping all over you. And for applying the "trolling" doggerel to you--it was penned in another context altogether and applied to a an ex-Catholic who really was anti-Catholic...but it doesn't apply to you....

I wasn't aware that I did so.

ZT

Dear Zoe,

"Primacy of Honour" is a term that comes from Ecumenical Councils, including the Vatican Council I where "Primacy of Honour" is (infallibly) affirmed as a prerogative of the Pope of Rome from time immemorial.

It was given to the first chair at an ecumenical council and denoted equality of all the bishops of the major Christian centres, but with a ranking of order within that system of equality.

In short, there is nothing "imperious" about it!

The term "Pope" comes not from Rome, but from Alexandria whose Patriarch was called "Pope" and also "New Pharaoh" and "Ecumenical Archbishop."

When the Pope of Alexandria held "immediate jurisdiction" over every priest and parish church of all Africa, the Bishop of Rome didn't even have jurisdiction over all of Italy yet and was referred to as "His Beatitude."

The titles the Roman Pontiff came from Alexandria and elsewhere, including the title "Pontifex Maximus" which was that of pagan Roman emperors.

In addition, the title "Vicar of Christ" was taken over by Roman Popes from the Byzantine Emperors who used this style.

If the Popes of Rome didn't like those imperial sounding titles, they didn't have to adopt them for themselves.

Alex

Alex--I meant mere primacy of honor--purely formal and ceremonial--as in the Orthodox claim that the pre-Schism Popes did not exercise true jurisdictional authority over the Church Universal. I think the Scriptural and patristic record refutes this EO claim. (If I didn't think this, I wouldn't be Catholic. )

Blessings,

ZT