www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Is anti-papal Catholic rhetoric the norm in Orthodoxy?

It seems to be better to address this topic head on rather than using any one person's words as the venue through which to try and address the various perspectives to be found among Orthodox clergy and faithful with regard to the possibilities for renewed communion or any impediments to any renewal of communion.

There is a language of dissenting ideas and outright accusation used among "Internet" Orthodox that is often characterized as being more extreme than normative.

Sometimes I wonder.

I'd like to believe it is the extreme, but the longer I am active in both confessions, the more I suspect that it might be more than some extreme fringe talking.

Perhaps it is not normative but I think that the anti-papal-Catholic voice in Orthodoxy in this country, at least, is quite strong, and quite influential.

Are there others who have different perspectives and if so could you tell me why and how you know. That's not a challenge. It is an attempt in the part of this blind man to get a better "view" of the elephant.

Eli

From my experience, the subject of the Papacy rarely if ever comes up in conversation among Orthodox.

We typically have more parochial things to discuss, like fasting recipes.

But we do talk, it is common to get together after liturgy, and most Orthodox in a Parish know each other by name.

Everyone has neighbors, friends and relatives who are Roman Catholics, it is not likely that most Orthodox are prejudiced against their friends and relatives.

If the topic of the papacy should come up though, you'll never hear anyone say it sounds like a good idea for us, any more than Roman Catholics would typically get together and say "hey, let's become Lutherans".

I think only Catholics can be "dissenters" in regards to the Papacy since they are in communion with that bishop. I have heard plenty of dissent from Catholics in regard to the Papacy.

I suppose Orthodox people could only be open to the charge of being guilty of accusations.

In terms of real life off the Internet, I would echo what Hesychios said.

Andrew

Allow me a couple of revisions. The Petrine Ministry is only one of the contested areas of theology, ecclisiology, and liturgy between Orthodox Catholics and papal Catholics. So I don't want to dwell necessarily on that one issue.

Any one is open for a discussion concerning the rhetorical habits of Orthodox interlocutors.

Also, one can speak of dissenting voices from external sources, particularly in the context of ecumenical dialogue, particularly with respect to bi-lateral dialogue. It would come in the form of 'this is what we can bear'--'this is what we cannot bear'--'we don't have anything at all to say to heretics'--'when you are ready to return to the one true Church, let us know'--etc.

Eli

I'll take that as a common experience.

My experiences outside of the Internet have been with instruction of catechumen, adult religious education classes, youth education classes, and selected times of lay retreats where doctrinal and theological topics are opened for discussion and perhaps debate as well as more prayerful examination.

In all those cases, I have heard some pretty stiff anti-papal Catholic rhetoric employed on a variety of issues. In fact I have been finding it difficult to get some Orthodox clergy and faithful to talk to me about Orthodoxy without defining things in the negative...'we don't belive this or that' which tends mostly to be directed at what they perceive that the papal Church does teach.

Of course I don't argue at those times. I point out references if I've cleared it with whoever is guiding the respective lessons or discussions, but I don't butt in unless invited. But the language is pretty clearly the language of rejection.

On occasion I am invited to express my own viewpoint. At those times, face to face, I don't get the same level of argumentation that is available on the Internet. My thoughts are welcomed by some and rejected outright by others, but it's done kindly in the main. Once in a while I hit a brick wall and the wall hits back

Eli

You may find that fundamentalist Orthodox, Orthodox active in church politics and agendas, and overly zealous converts will have a negative word or two about the Papacy.

On the other hand, those of us who have been born into Orthodoxy, both here and abroad, generally have very good things to say about him.

He is our elder Patriarch and a spokesperson for our shared Christianity, and while you may not hear us actually articulate that, it is quite evident in our affection towards the person and the title.

In the particular case of American born of Greek descent Orthodox, you will see that we co-exist with our Roman Catholic brethren quite beautifully. They are our relatives, our neighbors, (especially in the 'old neighborhoods'), our friends and our co-workers. Infact, most of the marriages recorded in the Archdiocese for many years now, are between Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox. Doesn't that just say it all?!?

In Christ,
Alice

Well, Alice, even if nobody else thinks so, *I* do.

Staro

Must be an old romantic in there.

Eli

Good Lord!

Greek understatement.

Never knew such a thing existed!!

Darn near missed it.

Eli

I will admit of negative talk of the RCC. That specifically of the way the Irish RC's in the USA treated the Rusyn 'Grecko Katholic' people of our ancestry. It was not enough to be in communion with Rome, but to be rubber stamped as 'we' do it. SO....the damage has been done. I observed such in the Pittsburg, PA area. How many UGCC and Byz Cath parishes closed or were absorbed by the predominate, or should I say the domineering RCC parishes..? More's the pity, even our near relatives have given in to this innovation and been absorbed by the liberal american ecclesiastical, and in some cases, apostate sects and cults. But alas, maybe a remnant will be raised by God in these times to re-establish a semblance of the historic pratice, pray to God it be so. S Bohom, mikhailo

I am sorry Elitoft, I don't quite get your drift.

Alice

Gee, I am confused Are you saying that you were Orthodox and experienced these things? or were you non-Orthodox attending Orthodox functions? or were you experiencing these things in Byzantine Catholic functions?

Again, I am confused. I am sorry I don't participate in this forum as much as in the deep dark past so I don't know what your frame of reference is. Did you come to Byzantine Catholicism through another Christian church? May I ask how long you have been affiliated with the Ruthenians?

Anyway, if we are talking strictly Roman Catholic-Orthodox theology I think I can explain some to the rejection. The Roman Catholic theology has some doctrines that simply have no counterpart in Orthodoxy, it's not like we have a "different but similar" doctrine, we don't have it. So a 'list' of doctrines east-west placed side by side would be longer on the western half, and would have holes in the corresponding places on the eastern half. Those are obviously the biggest differences and naturally the only way to address them is to say "we don't have that" :p

+T+
Michael

Michael,

Can you provide some specific examples?

Nice avatar, BTW. Your missing the kiss, though! I suppose it could not fit on the frame.

Gordo

Dissension to me is still an intra and not inter confessional affair. Maybe it�s just semantics. Doesn�t really matter though, unless your point in choosing the word was to frame Orthodox Christians as a party of dissenters with a deliberate choice of that word a la Likoudis.

I admit I�m not really sure what this thread is supposed to get to, any more than I would understand what the point of a thread titled something like �how common is anti-Orthodox rhetoric in Catholicism� started by an Orthdox Christian. I�ve run across it, but I don�t lose any sleep over it. I think in general people tend to get defensive when you start discussing their problems instead of looking at your own. That's just a general statement, I certainly know from reading this board people don't shrink from criticizing their own church.

If the topic is in regards to ecumenical dialog, I guess I would have a few of thoughts.

- The people generally involved in ecumenical dialog are the ones open to the other side. Generally they are not the outspoken critics. So it seems to me the criticism or dissension is probably coming from the sidelines.

- The RCC is in a somewhat easier bargaining position by nature in this dialog, though I have heard people propose things I know the Orthodox will never accept.

- The success or failure of these discussions will have nothing to do with American Orthodoxy, American converts, Internet Orthodoxy, etc. The issues, the opposition, the proponents, the history is all where it�s always been. That is where these things will come to fruition or fail outright.

Andrew

Humor. A vain attempt at humor. If you'd like to twist this into something ugly too, feel free.

Eli