|
1 members (biblicalhope),
471
guests, and
102
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,511
Posts417,518
Members6,161
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
|
|
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1 |
Now, is intercommunion necessary to fight this battle or is it sufficient that each Christian have his own local, apostolic Church in which he can commune? Joe, The Apostolic Churches are excommunicated from one another (that's what it means to exclude each other from Holy Communion) because they see each other as counterfeit christians, preaching a counterfeit christ. This way, each side can proudly proclaim itself to be the pure, undivided Church of Christ, since "they" are no part of the Church or of Christ. This is a serious charge, and in making it, one ought to be very sure in his heart that this is God's judgment and not man's. However, it is the only judgment possible unless we either admit the possibility of divisions within the Church, or we really think that Christ Himself is somehow divided  If Christ is not divided, then His people must not be divided. Maintaining this separation not only give a false witness to the world outside--who really is watching, despite what we might think--but to ourselves, who see Him reflected much more imperfectly in a Church that finds itself unable to discern between what is from God and what is from men. For us to be truly transformed into Christ, our heart must be where His is--and I don't think there's any doubt about where that is.  Peace, Deacon Richard
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
Father Deacon Richard,
It goes without saying that any of us can say that what is needed is prayer and humility on all sides. I take this as something for granted. But what things, concretely, must happen in order to permit intercommunion? Or must anything happen? Should people just start doing it?
Should the Orthodox say, "Look it really doesn't matter if the pope is infallible or not, let's just declare ourselves in communion, let catholics approach our chalices, and carry on as before?" Or should Catholics say, "listen, you all do not need to embrace anything other than what you currently believe. Let's just re-establish communion and the Pope will only be infallible and supreme in the West and will leave you guys alone?"
You see I too think that prayer and humility and compassion are essential for Christian unity. But we can pray, be humble, be sensitive and be compassionate, but unless there is some concrete solution that is agreed upon, I don't see how intercommunion can happen. So, what concretely must happen in order for intercommunion to be established right now?
Joe
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
And I would suspect this all boils down to two issues
1. the churches teaching on artificial birth control and
2. No divorice.
Stephanos I
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
I read back and I'm at a loss to understand how the RCC pastoral provisions for either of those affect this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 36
BANNED Member
|
|
BANNED Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 36 |
I think the unity of East and West is as urgent as any moral imperative. But it is apparently not felt to be urgent by many. While Catholics have certainly been making efforts and been quite generous in the talks that produced the Ravenna Document, there seems to be a decided lack of urgency on the part of the Orthodox. [ . . . ] My only question is how long before the Catholic world loses interest? Soon, I hope. I don't want to be Catholic. I don�t want to be in union with the Catholic Church. I don't believe that unity with the Catholic Church is either imperative or urgent or reflective of "the mind of Christ." And that's because I don't believe in the Catholic religion. I don't mean that disrespectfully. The Catholic religion works well enough as a way to God, and I genuinely respect that, and I�m genuinely glad for the people who find their way to God through it. Instead, I mean that I don't believe in many of the Catholic Church's teachings. For example, I don't believe in the papacy. I don�t believe that it has universal jurisdiction, and I don�t believe that it has supreme authority (on earth) over the Church. I don't believe in the birth control teaching. I don't believe in the divorce teaching. I don't believe in the filioque. I don't believe that the Bishop of Rome can change the Creed all by himself. Etc. I don't believe in a lot of things that the Catholic Church teaches. Also, I don't like Catholic worship. For some people, it works well as a form of worship. And that is a good thing. I really mean that, because it helps them get closer to God. But for myself, I was about ready to scream if I had to endure another novus ordo Mass . . . with people holding hands, or clapping, or performing �liturgical dance� etc. Also, I don't believe that returning to the Tridentine Mass at this late time would make things any better. It would work for some, but (by now) it would hurt a lot of others. Meanwhile, I have discovered the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, and I greatly prefer that. Some Eastern Catholics do a good job with that too, but I prefer attending it at the Orthodox Church; and so I do. In short, I'm not a Catholic. Nor am I a Catholic refugee. I'm an Orthodox Christian. I am very imperfect as one, and I am a sinner. Nevertheless, Holy Orthodoxy is the religion which I try to practice, because Holy Orthodoxy is the religion that I believe in. And, as an Orthodox Christian, I don't want reunion with Rome. I don't believe what Rome teaches, and I don�t like what Rome does, and I don�t think that Rome is truly reflective of the Gospel in certain areas. Some people will be profoundly offended by that statement, but they shouldn�t be. If I believed in and approved of the Roman Catholic Church, then I would belong to it. But I don�t, so I�m not a member of it. It�s a simple statement of fact. Some people believe in the Catholic religion, and so they are Catholic. Others don�t believe in the Catholic religion, so we are not Catholic. It�s not an offense; it is simply the way things are. What is wearisome to me --and, I imagine, to many others-- is the current Roman drive for �ecumenism.� I don't believe in having "unity" for the sake of unity. I don't believe in unity among churches without also having a unity of beliefs. Yet, that is what seems to be the driving goal for the Roman Catholic push for �ecumenism� . . . because it fails to recognize that we are fundamentally different churches. Let's be honest. Our churches -- the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church-- got a divorce a thousand years ago. We got a divorce because of problems that had been building for centuries before that. And even though theoretically a lot of the surface level problems can be worked out on paper, the deeper problems cannot. That is because we are too fundamentally different. We are different in mindset (cataphatic versus apophatic). We are different in tradition (Latin versus Greek / Syriac / Copt). Most of all, we are different in our understanding of authority in the Church. Catholics see one God, one Christ and one pope. Orthodox see one God, one Christ, and many bishops -- just as there were many apostles on that first Pentecost. Those are incompatible ideas of Church authority. Either the Bishop of Rome is the head of all the Church -- as the Catholics believe. Or, the Bishop of Rome is just a first among equals of all the bishops -- as the Orthodox believe. To return to the metaphor of divorce, we have irreconcilable differences. For either church to give up its basic views would mean sacrificing basic, vital parts of its identity, and that is unacceptable. And because of those irreconcilable differences, our Churches got a divorce. And, in my opinion, divorced we should remain. That is because the reasons for our divorce still exist. They aren�t going to change, and they aren�t going to go away. And the last thing that I would want to do is to get remarried while the reasons for a divorce are still real. It�s would be a lie and a violation. So, let us agree to be good neighbors. In this imperfect but real situation, the unity which Christ prayed for can be achieved by being good neighbors. We can be charitable to each other. We can respect each other -- including our differences. And we can be united with each other in the common causes of the Gospel that challenge our world. We really can be a we without being part of the same group. We really can be good neighbors. Catholics are about half of the world's Christians. But the other half is not Catholic . . . and we like being non-Catholic. And I would dearly like it if we could get just agree to disagree and to live as good neighbors. -- John JOhn, You express quite eloquently my observation that many Orthodox have a greater disdain for the legitimate Petrine Office than they have a desire to conform to the will of Christ. There appears to be a relishing of division for its own sake. Is this a fruit of the Holy Spirit? Clearly not. And so, this moment of opportunity in which Rome is generously working toward unity may be eventually be exhausted. Perhaps this is why Jesus told Peter to forgive 70 times 7 times. Fortunately for the Orthodox and for all the detractors of Christ and his Church, it is Peter's Office to forgive.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,765 Likes: 29
John Member
|
|
John Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,765 Likes: 29 |
I think the unity of East and West is as urgent as any moral imperative. But it is apparently not felt to be urgent by many. While Catholics have certainly been making efforts and been quite generous in the talks that produced the Ravenna Document, there seems to be a decided lack of urgency on the part of the Orthodox. [ . . . ] My only question is how long before the Catholic world loses interest? Soon, I hope. I don't want to be Catholic. I don�t want to be in union with the Catholic Church. I don't believe that unity with the Catholic Church is either imperative or urgent or reflective of "the mind of Christ." And that's because I don't believe in the Catholic religion. I don't mean that disrespectfully. The Catholic religion works well enough as a way to God, and I genuinely respect that, and I�m genuinely glad for the people who find their way to God through it. Instead, I mean that I don't believe in many of the Catholic Church's teachings. For example, I don't believe in the papacy. I don�t believe that it has universal jurisdiction, and I don�t believe that it has supreme authority (on earth) over the Church. I don't believe in the birth control teaching. I don't believe in the divorce teaching. I don't believe in the filioque. I don't believe that the Bishop of Rome can change the Creed all by himself. Etc. I don't believe in a lot of things that the Catholic Church teaches. Also, I don't like Catholic worship. For some people, it works well as a form of worship. And that is a good thing. I really mean that, because it helps them get closer to God. But for myself, I was about ready to scream if I had to endure another novus ordo Mass . . . with people holding hands, or clapping, or performing �liturgical dance� etc. Also, I don't believe that returning to the Tridentine Mass at this late time would make things any better. It would work for some, but (by now) it would hurt a lot of others. Meanwhile, I have discovered the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, and I greatly prefer that. Some Eastern Catholics do a good job with that too, but I prefer attending it at the Orthodox Church; and so I do. In short, I'm not a Catholic. Nor am I a Catholic refugee. I'm an Orthodox Christian. I am very imperfect as one, and I am a sinner. Nevertheless, Holy Orthodoxy is the religion which I try to practice, because Holy Orthodoxy is the religion that I believe in. And, as an Orthodox Christian, I don't want reunion with Rome. I don't believe what Rome teaches, and I don�t like what Rome does, and I don�t think that Rome is truly reflective of the Gospel in certain areas. Some people will be profoundly offended by that statement, but they shouldn�t be. If I believed in and approved of the Roman Catholic Church, then I would belong to it. But I don�t, so I�m not a member of it. It�s a simple statement of fact. Some people believe in the Catholic religion, and so they are Catholic. Others don�t believe in the Catholic religion, so we are not Catholic. It�s not an offense; it is simply the way things are. What is wearisome to me --and, I imagine, to many others-- is the current Roman drive for �ecumenism.� I don't believe in having "unity" for the sake of unity. I don't believe in unity among churches without also having a unity of beliefs. Yet, that is what seems to be the driving goal for the Roman Catholic push for �ecumenism� . . . because it fails to recognize that we are fundamentally different churches. Let's be honest. Our churches -- the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church-- got a divorce a thousand years ago. We got a divorce because of problems that had been building for centuries before that. And even though theoretically a lot of the surface level problems can be worked out on paper, the deeper problems cannot. That is because we are too fundamentally different. We are different in mindset (cataphatic versus apophatic). We are different in tradition (Latin versus Greek / Syriac / Copt). Most of all, we are different in our understanding of authority in the Church. Catholics see one God, one Christ and one pope. Orthodox see one God, one Christ, and many bishops -- just as there were many apostles on that first Pentecost. Those are incompatible ideas of Church authority. Either the Bishop of Rome is the head of all the Church -- as the Catholics believe. Or, the Bishop of Rome is just a first among equals of all the bishops -- as the Orthodox believe. To return to the metaphor of divorce, we have irreconcilable differences. For either church to give up its basic views would mean sacrificing basic, vital parts of its identity, and that is unacceptable. And because of those irreconcilable differences, our Churches got a divorce. And, in my opinion, divorced we should remain. That is because the reasons for our divorce still exist. They aren�t going to change, and they aren�t going to go away. And the last thing that I would want to do is to get remarried while the reasons for a divorce are still real. It�s would be a lie and a violation. So, let us agree to be good neighbors. In this imperfect but real situation, the unity which Christ prayed for can be achieved by being good neighbors. We can be charitable to each other. We can respect each other -- including our differences. And we can be united with each other in the common causes of the Gospel that challenge our world. We really can be a we without being part of the same group. We really can be good neighbors. Catholics are about half of the world's Christians. But the other half is not Catholic . . . and we like being non-Catholic. And I would dearly like it if we could get just agree to disagree and to live as good neighbors. -- John JOhn, You express quite eloquently my observation that many Orthodox have a greater disdain for the legitimate Petrine Office than they have a desire to conform to the will of Christ. There appears to be a relishing of division for its own sake. Is this a fruit of the Holy Spirit? Clearly not. And so, this moment of opportunity in which Rome is generously working toward unity may be eventually be exhausted. Perhaps this is why Jesus told Peter to forgive 70 times 7 times. Fortunately for the Orthodox and for all the detractors of Christ and his Church, it is Peter's Office to forgive. There is no disdain for Catholicism in John's [harmon3110] post. You are seeing things that are not there because you do not understand. Please remember that the first rule of this Forum is charity. Charity includes the requirement to be accurate in your posts as well as fair and generous in your reading of the posts of others. In your short time here you have not been very charitable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10 |
And I would suspect this all boils down to two issues
1. the churches teaching on artificial birth control and
2. No divorice.
Stephanos I Dear Father, These are legitimate issues which each Father/Patriarch has a right to address in their own fashion..ie: legalism or economia. In spiritual unity, I don't believe that either East or West will have a right to dictate anything to each other...my brother in law cannot and should not tell my husband how to raise our children, nor visa versa!  Respectfully, Alice
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
And I would suspect this all boils down to two issues
1. the churches teaching on artificial birth control and
2. No divorice.
Stephanos I Dear Father, These are legitimate issues which each Father/Patriarch has a right to address in their own fashion..ie: legalism or economia. In spiritual unity, I don't believe that either East or West will have a right to dictate anything to each other...my brother in law cannot and should not tell my husband how to raise our children, nor visa versa! Respectfully, Alice Alice, The problem is that Rome thinks that her teachings on birth control and divorce are infallible and are binding on all human beings. I think we will have to wait a few generations until Rome changes these teachings before reunion can happen, unless the hierarchs just choose to ignore the issue altogether and pretend that there isn't an issue. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
Dear Joe,
Perhaps the first thing that Rome can do in this regard is to acknowledge that a church's "culture" is not only its values, but what its members actually practice in real life as well.
When that happens, there shouldn't be any problems in this regard whatever.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10 |
I think we will have to wait a few generations until Rome changes these teachings before reunion can happen, unless the hierarchs just choose to ignore the issue altogether and pretend that there isn't an issue. I think that ignoring these issues will be the case. There are much more important theological fish which are being fried right now by our able representatives! Both brothers feel essentially the same way, it is just a matter of how they approach it. It is not as if the Orthodox Church rejoices about or celebrates the necessity for birth control and divorce!!! Regards, Alice, who is ever optomistic that God's dictate for reconciliation and spiritual unity of His Body will prevail. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
I think we will have to wait a few generations until Rome changes these teachings before reunion can happen, unless the hierarchs just choose to ignore the issue altogether and pretend that there isn't an issue. I think that ignoring these issues will be the case. There are much more important theological fish which are being fried right now by our able representatives! Both brothers feel essentially the same way, it is just a matter of how they approach it. It is not as if the Orthodox Church rejoices about the necessity for birth control and divorce!!! Regards, Alice, who is ever optomistic that God's dictate for reconciliation and spiritual unity of His Body will prevail. Alice, But the difference is that Rome teaches that using birth control is on a par with murder, sodomy, adultery, and all sorts of other nasty things. A person who freely uses birth control with full knowledge that it is a mortal sin is going to hell. On the other hand, we in the Orthodox Church might look at the selfish use of birth control as being a lack of Christian perfection and a sin, but we aren't in a hurry to pronounce damnation because of it. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10 |
Dear Joe,
Perhaps the first thing that Rome can do in this regard is to acknowledge that a church's "culture" is not only its values, but what its members actually practice in real life as well.
When that happens, there shouldn't be any problems in this regard whatever.
Alex Excellent points...I am sensing a 'tongue in the cheek' about this part, however-- but what its members actually practice in real life as well. No further comment is necessary, because you said it all. Thank you. Alice
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
Dear Alice, Well, I'm perfectly serious, as much as is possible for me, on this score. Perhaps Catholics in the U.S. are true to their actual faith and moral principles. If so, more power to them! But I don't live in the U.S. so my perspective is different as a result . . . Both Catholics and Orthodox practice the same things when it comes to birth control and divorce - except they call them different things (i.e. "annulments," "Catholics who practice birth control are still members in good standing due to invincible ignorance" etc.). If so, then the Orthodox are being honest about both their values and their praxis, while Catholics are not, in the main. And the adage, "ignorance is bliss" cannot become an ecclesiological principle (!). But I'll stop here - I think I sense Logos-Alexis online . . . Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,994 Likes: 10 |
Dear Alex,
By and far, Catholics are most definitely practicing family limitation in the U.S.
I have had RC friends tell me that they are given dispensation by their priests. So Rome needs to take a serious look at this issue...
Also, it is regrettable that it is viewed as being as morally sinful as abortion by some extreme Catholics. I think that *equating the two* has actually given much ammunition to those involved in the pro-abortion movement, which is really sad...a case of 'backfiring' if I ever saw one.
This thread isn't about birth control, so let's get off this topic now.
Alice
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 17
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 17 |
I've posted that I am truly stuck with regard to the Catholic Church and the EO church. I don't honestly know where I belong. But reading the last few posts, I have to say I am fully behind the RCC teachign on divorce and ABC. It seems clear enough Jesus's teaching on divorce and that it was legal under the OC because of man's weakness. It also seems pretty logical that ABC clearly thwarts what God may have as procreative plans for us. These are two issues for me that allow me to see what I think are "negatives" in the EO church, but I guess this is off topic. Doesn't much matter what the "culture" of a church is doing--truth is truth and not relative to what most of the parishioners are doing.
I can't recall who posted that they didn't want unity with the RCCs (Harmon3110?)--I see that as sad and in direct contrast with Jesus's prayer that we may all be one and I guess I was "misreading" the tone of the post too because I felt the sting of disdain, but perhaps I was misinterpreting the post. I'd have never thought it possible that this separation would actually cause spiritual pain. I'm still trying to read that post and figure out how it was not filled with disdain for Catholicism and for unity.
Last edited by Glad; 12/18/07 11:48 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
