|
1 members (1 invisible),
184
guests, and
63
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,469
Posts417,242
Members6,107
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
I appreciate this honesty on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church. If there is to be any worthwhile discussion, then all equivocation must be stopped and the conversants in the theological dialogue need to speak clearly. I agree, so I actually laud this being released, because hopefully it will clear away false notions. To me it simply reinforces my belief that restoration of formal relations between the churches would involve one side or the other fatally compromising something about itself. To me, this is the Vatican essentially saying it isn't going to be them that will do such a thing. That sort of does put the onus on our hierarchs. Hopefully they will issue a statement saying it is our belief that the fullness of faith and grace is found in the Orthodox Church. Everyone can draw their own conclusions about who is hindering relations or creating distance based on all of this. I personally believe it's irrelevant to speculate on that, but I don't believe it is our church that is the issue. Would it then be fair to say that you are not interested in dialogue that is designed to seek understandings about one another and ourselves that are acceptable to all? I don't ask that question to be nasty mind you. It is your last statement that prompts the inquiry. Mary
Last edited by Elijahmaria; 07/10/07 12:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 302
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 302 |
They observe the Lord's Supper because Christ told his Disciples to remember that he suffered and died for them.
Most matters of faith in Protestant churches is up to the individual & God.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
So basically what you're saying is that there is no Body of Christ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
You are not wholly accurate. It depends on which creedal, or non-creedal, or congregationalist (ect) denomination you are describing. Evangelical Protestants would be in step with your description, but there are other branches which would balk at that idea.
Protestants are not uniform in their approach to faith.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
I appreciate this honesty on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church. If there is to be any worthwhile discussion, then all equivocation must be stopped and the conversants in the theological dialogue need to speak clearly. I agree, so I actually laud this being released, because hopefully it will clear away false notions. To me it simply reinforces my belief that restoration of formal relations between the churches would involve one side or the other fatally compromising something about itself. To me, this is the Vatican essentially saying it isn't going to be them that will do such a thing. That sort of does put the onus on our hierarchs. Hopefully they will issue a statement saying it is our belief that the fullness of faith and grace is found in the Orthodox Church. Everyone can draw their own conclusions about who is hindering relations or creating distance based on all of this. I personally believe it's irrelevant to speculate on that, but I don't believe it is our church that is the issue. Andrew, You are absolutely right. We Orthodox are accused of not being willing to compromise, but neither will Rome. And to be honest, if each Church believes that it holds the fullness of the faith and the other doesn't, then how could there be any compromise? joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 730
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 730 |
Protestants are not uniform in their approach to faith. Only Protestants? May I introduce you to the Revised Divine Liturgy Forum? - most importantly my last thread regarding "The Controversy and Its Historical Setting" (Chapter 2) of Fr. Keleher's momentous tome. This history speaks of an extreme chasm between two philosophical schools of thought. (See my last few quotes and questions). Who would you follow as good Catholics? I don't ask this to be argumentative, but to demonstrate that 'uniformity' in Catholic belief and practice is less than perfect. It seems like some Catholics still hvae to work out their uniformity of teaching and practice. Maybe once this is accomplished, one can with certainty regard us Protestants as lacking uniformity. Eddie
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
Mary,
Is not the acceptance of the Petrine ministry as entailing the universal jurisdiction and (under certain conditions) the infallibility of the Pope a change in what Orthodoxy currently teaches? If the universal jurisdiction of the papacy and papal infallibility are dogmas of the Catholic Church, then we Orthodox are in formal schism. Indeed, we deny a fundamental Dogmatic truth of the Catholic faith. I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way.
Joe Our current pope, writing under the name of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in Principles of Catholic Theology, thinks differently. He says flat out that we cannot ask more of Orthodoxy than she was willing to profess in the first thousand years. It seems to me that the bi-lateral discussions are there to determine what we can agree on in terms of the first thousand years. And there has always been the stated claim of the Catholic Church from the time of John Paul II to the present that we are in material and not formal schism, that there is full grace in Orthodox sacraments and that there is full Apostolic succession in Orthodoxy. So it is still Orthodoxy who is increasing the distance, not the Catholic Church. Mary Mary, Joseph Ratzinger wrote that book as a private theologian, not as Pope, so it has no authority. Also, we could ask Pope Benedict XVI what he thinks was believed in the first millenium regarding the primacy. It is the Catholic Church's position that universal and supreme jurisdiction as well as papal infallibility were always believed by the Church, even if not always explicitly expressed with the clarity of Vatican I. It is not the Orthodox who are perpetuating the schism. It is the fact that Rome and the Orthodox Churches have different views of the papacy and those views are irreconcilable. Our position is that we have maintained the faith of the ancient apostolic Church, while Rome has took it upon herself to proclaim herself as the source of all of the other Churches and the final judge against which no man may appeal. This document is a reminder. In our view, this means that Rome has departed from Orthodoxy and must repent. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2 |
You know, the church would be so perfect if you could just get rid of the #&$^&* people! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
In light of your comments and others I am going to back out of this discussion. Anything I say now will be held against me.
In closing, I think it is safe to say that I do not know why there is any effort at all at bilateral discussion and I wonder why there is no formal declaration of schism and heresy against the Catholic Church from universal Orthodoxy.
Mary
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390 |
Amadeus, you're right I erred. He's saying that the only Christian church that saves is the Catholic Church. The only perfect christian church is the Catholic Church.
I know Protestants that would qualify for sainthood if they were Catholic.
Like I said before, it makes me wonder. What do you wonder?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2 |
It's too bad we can't seem to agree to disagree on some things, then do the best we can to solve some common problems. We have much bigger enemies than each other - try secularism and radical Islam. These could eventually cause both the Roman and the Orthodox churches to suffer greatly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
It's too bad we can't seem to agree to disagree on some things, then do the best we can to solve some common problems. We have much bigger enemies than each other - try secularism and radical Islam. These could eventually cause both the Roman and the Orthodox churches to suffer greatly. But we can agree to disagree on things. We must agree to disagree on the nature of papal primacy and yet we must pray with one another and for one another and help one another as best we can. We cannot enter into full communion, but we can respect one another and do everthing but intercommune. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
In light of your comments and others I am going to back out of this discussion. Anything I say now will be held against me.
In closing, I think it is safe to say that I do not know why there is any effort at all at bilateral discussion and I wonder why there is no formal declaration of schism and heresy against the Catholic Church from universal Orthodoxy.
Mary Mary, The document seems to be pretty straightforward to me and I can respect the CDF's point of view. I just don't agree with it. We should dialogue but we should not expect agreement unless one side capitulates. We, the Orthodox, do not believe that the Pope has universal and supreme jurisdiction over the Church and we do not believe that the pope can speak and proclaim anything infallibly on his own, "ex cathedra," and we do not believe that the source of grace and truth in our Churches is the Church of Rome. Rome is not the mother of all Churches. Jerusalem is the mother of all Churches. Rome, being the ancient capital of the empire and the site of the martyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul is the most esteemed of the Churches and so has a kind of primacy of honor, as a Church to be deferred to out of respect. But all of the Churches are, in fact, equal and no Church can rule any other. Rome cannot rule Moscow. Moscow cannot rule Constantinople. Constantinople cannot rule Antioch, etc. This is our position and from everything I've ever read and heard, I believe that for the Orthodox hierarchs it is non-negotiable. I have never hid that this was my view. I do want dialogue as brothers and sisters in Christ, prayer for one another, and support for the ways in which each of us is called to serve Christ. But one side can't force the other into agreement and communion by suggesting that the grounds for the schism are not real and serious. Mary, I don't mind sparring a bit and you give me many things to think about and wrestle with. But, I am just laying out unequivocally where I am coming from. Joe
Last edited by JSMelkiteOrthodoxy; 07/10/07 01:04 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2 |
It's too bad we can't seem to agree to disagree on some things, then do the best we can to solve some common problems. We have much bigger enemies than each other - try secularism and radical Islam. These could eventually cause both the Roman and the Orthodox churches to suffer greatly. But we can agree to disagree on things. We must agree to disagree on the nature of papal primacy and yet we must pray with one another and for one another and help one another as best we can. We cannot enter into full communion, but we can respect one another and do everthing but intercommune. Joe YES!!! I totally agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
And, keep in mind too that it is not we Orthodox who brought up, again, this issue of papal primacy and the nature of the Church. It is Rome taking the initiative to remind everyone that it is necessary (from Rome's point of view) that to be the Church of Christ in the fullest sense, a Church must be in communion with (under the governing authority of...) the Pope of Rome.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
