www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Pope Benedict says Orthodox are defective

Zan, I hardly think I sound like a Roman Catholic Traditionalist of the sspx variety. If I was, I, along with the not quite there yet James Likoudis would be yearning for a return of the pontificate of Boniface VIII.

Let me also clarify something you have taken offense at. I did not accuse your leader of following the devil. I quoted one of your truly great and Orthodox popes , Pope Gregory the Great.

Pope Gregory in letters to John the Faster , Patriarch of Constantinople and others used the imagery of demonic inspiration to identify prelates who would dare assume the mantle of "Universal" or Bishop of bishops to either exalt themselves or attempt to subject fellow bishops to themselves.

If the shoes of the fisherman fit...well I'll let others decide that.

Also I want to make it very clear that it is not my intention to unduly offend anyone personally here. I do understand however that differences that are real and centuries old will, of, and by themselves offend when exposed or clarified.

Some of these differences are of such a profound nature that it will become neccessary for one of the parties to admit fault and actually repudiate their error. The split between the Latin West and Orthodox East was first and foremost over papal prerogatives and that needs to be addressed in light of genuine Holy Tradition.

I have been plesantly surprised that a good number of respected Roman Catholic scholars are also raising serious questions about papal prerogatives and re-examining them in the light of history and the patristic witness. These are actually noted scholars and none of them are floating around Steubenville or EWTN

Those of us and I count myself one who want the union of all cannot settle for a kumbaya ecumenism.

Anyway I will now give this a rest as I have alreadfy dedicated to much effort and will probably be considered over the edge by our much more sensible moderators.

Quoting facts is one thing - theology is an entirely different matter such as his tendentious (at best) defense of the filioque. It's interesting that after he made that defense, Pope JP II saw it fit to celebrate several times and omit it publically.

I see nothing compelling from either a historical or theological perspective in any of Likoudous' works. They simply do not either foster unity nor even foster greater historical understanding. I've heard him speak, and remain unconvinced.

That phrase was intended for a very definite reason in the West, which time has come and past, and it is time to return to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed as promulgated by the Councils. As an Eastern Catholic I am insulted by his contention that the entire Greek basis for disputing it arises from a "defective" understanding of primacy. He has continually dismissed any notion of actually being faithful to the Councils that promulgated the Creed as being a credible response to removing the Filioque. He does neither the Catholic nor the Orthodox churches service by this polemic and contentious witness, which angers many Eastern Catholics.

As a Greek Catholic who accepts the Petrine Ministry and who also accepts the Creed as defined by the First and Second Councils that sort of oversimplistic, rote polemic is highly insulting.

You must have missed my post. Likoudis' idea that opposition to the i]Filioque [/i] is strictly based on the refusal to accept primacy is at best ridiculous.

For Christ Himself, the Son of God, consecrates and marks her as his own with the Holy Spirit, as it were with his own character and seal...And in like manner the Vicar of Christ by his primacy and foresight as a faithful servant keeps the Church universal subject to Christ.

In one of his minor works, St. Gregory of Nyssa argues briefly that the Spirit is called 'glory' by our Lord in His prayer to the Father at the Last Supper (in Jn. 17:5):


Toward the end of the last of his great sermons on The Song of Songs, Gregory again remarks that the Spirit is called 'glory' by our Lord in Jn.17:5 & 22. (22)

...[This is] the greatest glory of the Son of God�namely that truth which asserts that He is the Principle of the Holy Spirit. This is greater than the glory which asserts that He is the Origin of all created things...[and] the Holy Spirit Himself that most noble act which is to glorify the Son in this, that, from the Son, He, the Holy Spirit eternally receives His Divine Being. For the greatest honor and glory of the Son consists in this: that He is the Origin of the Holy Spirit.

...[This is] the greatest glory of the Son of God�namely that truth which asserts that He is the Principle of the Holy Spirit. This is greater than the glory which asserts that He is the Origin of all created things...[and] the Holy Spirit Himself that most noble act which is to glorify the Son in this, that, from the Son, He, the Holy Spirit eternally receives His Divine Being. For the greatest honor and glory of the Son consists in this: that He is the Origin of the Holy Spirit.

So as of this post I am warning anyone who responds to the posts since I asked for forbearance this morning, post at your own risk. I will recommend suspensions for any more uncharitable posts. I am also recommending to the administrators that this post be closed.

BOB