About Orthodoxy

[dzheremi]

I do not understand this division between “ultra-conservative Orthodox” and whatever else there is out there. There is no “progressive” Orthodoxy (at least not in the Catholic sense with regard to the mindsets and behaviors that are often decried by more liturgically/theologically conservative Catholics). I have spent a surprising amount of time since first beginning to seriously investigate Orthodoxy about two years ago defending what I take to be Orthodox positions from the protestations of actually baptized-Orthodox people. Never once did it occur to me to think of myself as “more Orthodox than the Pope” (a phrase that makes sense with regard to JohnVIII’s and my proclivities) as a result, so I’m not so sure I buy into JohnVIII’s general thesis. I know that there are such people out there (I’ve interacted with some here on CAF), but I don’t think it is any more a property of Orthodoxy than the presence of Sedevacantists could be used to make particular points against Catholicism. In the end, Catholicism is what it is, Orthodoxy is what it is, and any deviation from either standard is exactly that: a deviation.

 

[Cavaradossi]

The differences between the two churches are as much POLITICAL as they are theological.

It all began because the Greek oriented Roman Empire was based in Constantinople, and essentially abandoned Rome, even though they still called themselves ROMANS. They were “The Roman Empire”, but relegated Rome to a backwater existence and essentially attempted to totally ignore it.

In the East, they not only ad the complete and full support of the “Civilian” government, but the Emperor virtually controlled who the leaders of the Church were. In fact, on more than one occasion, the Emperor deposed the Patriarch, and appointed another in his place.

Yes, and Orthodoxy also had to deal with heretic emperors quite often, yet orthodox belief survived even the most brutal heretics (like the monothelite emperor who imprisoned Maximus the Confessor and had his tongue and right hand cut off).

In the West, the Bishop of Rome was the Church Power, and he appointed Emperors and Kings. This led to the Bishop of Rome becoming both a religious AND a civil power, something that the East never experienced.

Exactly, the pope’s claim to supremacy was a historical accident. It was not like that during the early years.

The Filoque was an EXCUSE, as the articles cited above make very clear. The East ignored it for centuries, and only brought it up when a Cardinal excommunicated the Patriarch. After that, it essentially became the single most important issue.

This is not very true. The East ignored the filioque because for the longest time, the popes were against it. Leo III for example, forbade the use of the filioque in the creed and even had the creed engraved on silver tablets sans filioque so that his decision could not be overturned in the future (obviously did not work).

Both sides could EASILY settle all of this, if they would agree to a true Ecumenical Council, to thrash out the various disagreements. But, neither will give an inch, instead calling the other side stubborn, and the East calling the West apostate (which the West no longer says about the East by the way).

It’s not that simple. The true barrier to reconciliation is the nature of the papacy, which is unacceptable to the Orthodox

The article (there was a citation to a series of articles from the Orthodox perspective listed above) about the Uniate Churches in Russia was a much more typical attack from the Orthodox than was the very well reasoned article for Roman Catholics. It attacked all Uniates as heretics, essentially said that all Uniates that were forced into Russian Orthodoxy by the Soviets should never be allowed to become one with the Catholic Church again, and that the Roman Catholic Church is nothing but evil incarnate (and that Pope John Paul II was essentially nothing more than an agent of the devil).

That kind of unreasoned bilge is, sadly, all too typical of Orthodox writers. There have no desire at all to EVER reunite. In fact, they would love to see the Catholic Church utterly destroyed, all of its doctrines confined to history and everyone that has ever supported that church to be condemned to hell.

There are also writers on the Catholic side (very “ecumenically minded” writers too) like Scott Hahn and Fr. Taft who say similar things about Orthodoxy.

It is sad indeed that a site that presents Orthodoxy so very well in its article directed at Roman Catholics, would also place such an unreasoned and hate filled article among its canon. BUT, that hate filled article represents the actual feelings and beliefs of all too many Orthodox, and it shows just why the vast majority of Orthodox will never consider any form of reunion.

Untrue. What you mean to say is that a majority of the Orthodox will never consider any form of reunion on Rome’s terms. The Orthodox want a true union with unity of Faith, not some false union which causes cognitive dissonance. I (and undoubtedly many other Orthodox Christians) have been shocked sometimes to see Eastern Catholics rail against Rome’s practices and even her theology even though they are in union with her.

 

[Cavaradossi]

One can only believe that Jesus must weep indeed that the successors of his apostles had led their “branches” of the church he established so very far apart.

I doubt he weeps, but he certainly must be disappointed. Still, there are no “branches” there is only one true Church and all others have fallen into error. Both the Catholics and the Orthodox affirm that to be true, even if they disagree on which Church is the true one.

It is those leaders, the ones that merely see evil in their “opponents”, that are truly doing the work of Satan.

Sadly, there are some of those types on BOTH sides of this issue. But, the majority appear to be on the Orthodox side, and they are unwilling to bend even to the slightest degree. It is, to use a modern expression, “Either their way or the highway”.

You mistake “our way or the highway” for thinking ill of Rome. I can assure you that most Orthodox Christians do not sit around in their homes and have a daily brooding session about how evil Rome is for doing the works of Satan. Rome barely registers on the minds of most Orthodox Christians except as being a sort of long lost cousin with which we are now speaking again after centuries of separation.

With such people, compromise is impossible, because THEY will NOT allow it. They do not care about God, they care about themselves. They care about their “position”, and NOT at all for what the Holy Spirit is trying to do.

And anyone, either Orthodox or Catholic that holds such a position is truly doing Satan’s work on this earth.

It is about time that both sides bend a bit, both sides agree to call a binding ecumenical council to thrash out the ‘THEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES", and once again bring the Universal Church into being as God willed it to be. Stop letting the petty quarrels of man prevent the majesty of God’ church from being.

That is idealistic, yes, but Rome and the East have some real differences which need to be settled before any such council could be called. If an Ecumenical Council were to be called, I doubt that any consensus would be reached with the state that the East-West dialogues are in right now. You must realize that from the Orthodox perspective, the Roman Catholics are being too willy-nilly with theology. Just because one side of a debate says “my position is the same as yours” doesn’t make it so: the other side must agree. The Orthodox are rather suspicious of the modern Roman Catholic approach of, “your theology is great! Now just accept the pope as the supreme vicar of God upon the earth and you too can hop into the pool.” If refusing to jump into the pool is being hate filled and accusing the Roman Catholics of being servants of Satan, then sure, I guess the Orthodox, myself included, are just a bunch of hate-filled, ethnically divided, anti-Catholics who do the work of Satan, but I am inclined to believe otherwise.

 

[dvdjs]

Originally Posted by The Old Medic View Post
The article (there was a citation to a series of articles from the Orthodox perspective listed above) about the Uniate Churches in Russia was a much more typical attack from the Orthodox than was the very well reasoned article for Roman Catholics. It attacked all Uniates as heretics, essentially said that all Uniates that were forced into Russian Orthodoxy by the Soviets should never be allowed to become one with the Catholic Church again, and that the Roman Catholic Church is nothing but evil incarnate (and that Pope John Paul II was essentially nothing more than an agent of the devil).

That kind of unreasoned bilge is, sadly, all too typical of Orthodox writers. There have no desire at all to EVER reunite. In fact, they would love to see the Catholic Church utterly destroyed, all of its doctrines confined to history and everyone that has ever supported that church to be condemned to hell.

There are also writers on the Catholic side (very “ecumenically minded” writers too) like Scott Hahn and Fr. Taft who say similar things about Orthodoxy.

Well, you would have to stretch the word “similar” beyond recognition for this comment to anything other than pure bologna. Let’s be clear: there is no parity.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Well, you would have to stretch the word “similar” beyond recognition for this comment to anything other than pure bologna. Let’s be clear: there is no parity.

You don’t think that Fr. Taft’s, “to hell with Russia comment” is on the same level?

 

[dvdjs]

You don’t think that Fr. Taft’s, “to hell with Russia comment” is on the same level?

Of course not. Did you actually read the interview in which he made that remark, or just the remark?

He was referring to their objections to and interference with the UGCC moving its cathedral to Kyiv. This is absolutely nothing like the attitude expressed in old Medic’s post, in which antagonists embrace the notion of suppressing people’s freedom of religion. And nothing about heretics or evil incarnate. The suggestion that Taft is on the same level is simply ridiculous.