www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Russian Orthodox Metropolitan Hopes that Pope Francis Will Not Su

You should be, that is the problem. One can be ecumenical with out being a doormat.

Somebody should ask Metropolitan Gennadios Zervos of The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy what his thoughts are on canonical territories and expansionism.

This stuff is so silly in the year 2013. The irony is that union would by definition end this controversy. The only logical conclusion is that the ROC has no interest in it. Feet firmly rooted in the past.

Why is this any surprise? He is simply restating the position of the MP. Unless something changed, it has always been the same. So I guess you are re-offended?

My brother,

I'm saddened that after after six centuries that this is still such a critical issue. It gives the impression that lording over canonical territory is more pressing than united faith in Christ.
The esteemed Metropolitan has a local view; if he and others looked broader he would see that the issue isn't as focused as he assumes. Orthodoxy has its problems also, the MP and EP won't talk to each other and they also squabble over canonical territory and cause scandal of the Faith. Back at the time of the unions, where was the great Russian Orthodox Church at the time of our suffering? Why didn't they support our monasteries and faithful? The EP was under the thumb of the Moslems, why didn't the MP step up? They had no interest in us then.

We Eastern Catholics are well aware of the faults of communion with the large and powerful Church of Rome. And certainly it has been repeated over and over ad nauseam. The Bishop of Rome has compromised much more than the MP with regard to canonical territory. In our own USA the Eastern Church didn't exist but yet it sprung up and we eventually received a bishop, then two bishops. Now we have metropolitan bishops and at least six different Eastern Catholic Church co-exist in Roman dioceses. How well does the MP get along with the Ukrainian Orthodox

or the Armenians?

Yes, we have had unjust restrictions, but mostly we have been our own enemy through lack of charity or lack of our own leadership.

We eastern Catholics generally encourage the Roman See to seek unity with the Orthodox. In return Orthodoxy seeks our destruction. I think it's about time that they respect our faith, for it is the same as yours.

Orthodoxy defies its spirit of brotherly love when it says we must die. Look beyond the past; look forward and plan for how the Eastern Catholics can be respectfully absorbed into the complete Eastern lung of the united Church.

Demanding preconditions and absolutes infers that the MP has no interest in union. The is no sense in wanting union with a Patriarch who wants to lord over you.

It is a total rejection of what Christ taught his disciples.

I would expect an Orthodox prelate to be opposed to the unia.

As long as "Western Rite Orthodox" exist, I have trouble seeing the reason for the upset.

That Russian bishop is insane if he actually believes that the Pope will abandon the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.
What craziness! And he calls himself a Christian?

You should be, that is the problem. One can be ecumenical with out being a doormat.

Evidently I'm just not as easily offended as some people. I wasn't offended when I was a High Church Anglican and Catholics told me that my Church was founded upon adultery and divorce, and that it was devoid of a real priesthood and eucharist. The Catholics who told me that really believed that to be so, and I didn't take offense when they said what they believed. As a Catholic I don't take offense when some of my Orthodox friends tell me that Catholic sacraments are devoid of grace, and that the Catholic Church is in heresy. It is what they believe, and I see no reason to be personally offended by their beliefs.

By the way, now when I talk to Anglicans, I tell them that I don't believe that their priesthood is valid or that their sacraments (other than baptism) are real. If they are personally offended too bad, because for me it is a matter of belief. I suppose, if I didn't believe what I was telling them, I would still be an Anglican.

Somebody should ask Metropolitan Gennadios Zervos of The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy what his thoughts are on canonical territories and expansionism.

This stuff is so silly in the year 2013.

The irony is that union would by definition end this controversy.

The only logical conclusion is that the ROC has no interest in it.

Feet firmly rooted in the past.

No surprise. I just thought maybe Pope Francis could have got more than a week in before Met. Hilarion started with this broken record again.

Why?

Why? Have canonical jurisdictions and boundaries been done away with?

The irony is that union would by definition end this controversy.

Not quite.

Better than wobbly legs disconnected from their past.

Union at any cost? And no, it is not the only logical conclusion, just a very one sided conclusion. And it is a complement for a Church to have its "feet firmly rooted in the past."

Because he's a learned man. No other reason having to do with churches having a presence in another church's cannonical territory.

See above.

Because they would all be Ukranian Christians united in one church.

Quite. Just own it, so much better to be straight forward. The holy monks on Mt Athos would agree, there's no shame in not desiring unity if it is based on principle, misguided though it may be. Hot or cold is always better than lukewarm.

When the past is one of pain and bitterness, not at all.

Wobbly legs can strengthen. It takes work and a desire to accomplish, which I see little evidence of.

On the flip side... Give the Russians Ukraine in return for communion and call them all Catholic... Who cares? Keeping two ancient, holy and apostolic churches separated over a local spat is silly.

Do have the same trouble seeing the difference between duress and accommodation?