Anglicans to Rome?

[mtr01]

Maccabees:

Who could possibly know more about the western church fathers well respected priest and theologian or an abortion mill?

Next thing we are going to get the abortion mill’s commentary on Matthew 16"18 oh well they abortion mill denies the papacy ergo you should too.

That last line killed me, Maccabees. Excellent point.

Father, I think Maccabees got you on this one. Honestly, why would you accept a pro-death site’s evaluation of Catholic Doctrine over (truly) a respected theologian like Fr. Hardon’s explanation?

Pushing the party line? that’s not a valid criticism. Or if it is, can we just throw out the opinions of Orthodox theologians when they are in conflict with those of the West “because they are pushing their party line?” Or perhaps you should accept the Catholic view of the filioque, since the Orthodox are just pushing their party line.

See what I mean?

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Father,

Do you recall this statement from you:

*At the beginning of the 13th century, Pope Innocent III wrote that “quickening” “the time when a woman first feels the fetus move within her” was the moment at which abortion became homicide; prior to quickening, abortion was a less serious sin.

Pope Gregory XIV agreed, designating quickening as occurring after a period of 116 days (about 17 weeks). His declaration in 1591 that early abortion was not grounds for excommunication continued to be the abortion policy of the Catholic Church until 1869.*
Have you bothered to read the passages from Exodus that I suggested in a previous post? Let me provide it here:

When men have a fight and hurt a pregnant woman, so that she suffers a miscarriage, but no further injury, the guilty one shall be fines as much as the woman’s husband demands of him, and he shall pay in the presence of the judges. But if injury ensues, you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, would for wound, stripe for stripe. Exodus 21:22-25 (NAB)

Tell us, Father. Are you now accusing God of supporting abortion? Please be consistent. As I asked before: WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON, pro-life or pro-abortion? Don’t even pretend to be insulted at my question. If you were really pro-life, you would not have even given a second thought to utilizing a pro-abortion resource, and utilizing arguments that pro-abortion advocates have made against Christians in general. You really need to go to your confessor immediately. This is a sincere suggestion. On this issue, you have sided with serpents, Father.

Please respond either with an explanation, or an admission that you were wrong. Your silence on the issue will be taken as an admission of your error.

God bless,

Greg

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Joannes:

Father Ambrose:

I find your posting very confusing. If all that you imply is true, what’s the good of it, since:

(1) Patriarch Joseph was already dead, so the allegedly forged testament* Extrema Sententia* had not influenced him.

It was a supposed to be HIS Last Will and Testament, composed by him and found beside his dead body. At this time the Pope was tired of the Orthodox “invincible ignorance” at the Council of Florence and had confined the Orthodox delegates to their quarters on minimum rations to force them into agreement.

It’s the weirdest thing about that Will!

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Joannes:

I had almost the identical experience years ago once when I and another pro-lifer innocently asked a a certain priest, perhaps the most eminent RO theologian in the US, for the EO position on abortion. I was shocked when, ignoring the heinous crime of abortion he intead hastened to contrast the EO position to the Catholic position in this way:

“We would never tell a woman she could not have an abortion. We’ might tell her she would have to do penance afterwards, blah, blah, blah.” He talked like a liberal !

This is all totally silly and you may be in the unenviable position of bearing false witness.

There are threads on this Forum which address the Orthodox teaching on abortion. They deal with every aspect of of it, up to and including the recent statement of the Moscow Patriarchate that it is the most heinous of sins.

The Metropolitan of the Orthodox Church in America led, as he does each year, the Orthodox faithful in the recent Right to Life March in the US capital.

There is far too much evidence, including dozens of websites which I can supply, to try and assert that the Orthodox allow abortion.

The only exceptions are the same as you have in the Catholic Church when the abortion is a secondary effect. Abortions which take place because of an otherwise lawful medical procedure that is required to save the life of the mother (e.g., chemotherapy, hysterectomy of a cancerous uterus) are given an exception from the canons under the principle of “double effect.”

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Father,

Can you please give us a source for your claim that the Greek delegates were locked away and fed mean rations in order to force them to submit? Thanks.

God bless,
Greg

 

[Maccabees]

Fr Ambrose:

This is all totally silly and you may be in the unenviable position of bearing false witness.

There are threads on this Forum which address the Orthodox teaching on abortion. They deal with every aspect of of it, up to and including the recent statement of the Moscow Patriarchate that it is the most heinous of sins.

The Metropolitan of the Orthodox Church in America led, as he does each year, the Orthodox faithful in the recent Right to Life March in the US capital.

There is far too much evidence, including dozens of websites which I can supply, to try and assert that the Orthodox allow abortion.

The only exceptions are the same as you have in the Catholic Church when the abortion is a secondary effect. Abortions which take place because of an otherwise lawful medical procedure that is required to save the life of the mother (e.g., chemotherapy, hysterectomy of a cancerous uterus) are given an exception from the canons under the principle of “double effect.”

Well if I am to trust your own sources father you are lieing it is well documented by the source that you trust CHILDBIRTH BY CHOICE TRUST that the Orthodox don’t oppose abortion especially in catholic countires. Seems to me the ORthodox want to kill catholic babies! Hmm juding by the tone of your post it has crossed my mind this is your motive.

Under the heading of Bulgaria the site says the Orthodx church in practice does not oppose abortion especially in catholic areas.
Since this site is so trustworthy we must beleive this.
Shame Shame on the Orthodox for trying to kill catholic babies.
Effective February 1, 1990, Bulgaria made abortion on request accessible to all women in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.39 Religion in Bulgaria (Eastern Orthodox) does not rigidly oppose women’s right to a voluntary induced abortion as strenuously as in some other European countries, especially those where the population is predominantly Roman Catholic.57

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Fr Ambrose:

At this time the Pope was tired of the Orthodox “invincible ignorance” at the Council of Florence and had confined the Orthodox delegates to their quarters on minimum rations to force them into agreement.

How times have changed -and for the better. I don’t suppose that they are planning on locking up Archbishop Hepworth and his negotiating party until they have overcome their invincible ignorance.

By the way, I have been a busy reseacher over the last week on this question of reception of the TAC and I am pleased to say that I have some concrete information. But the down side is that it is embargoed until later in February.

I can say that what the TAC wants is not a sui juris-style Church but integration into the Roman Catholic Church with the right to retain a married episcopate and married priests since the Church is based on the family and not on celibate clergy.

Good grief, I am actually on topic!!! How unorthodox!!!

 

[Joannes]

Hello Father Ambrose:

No, I merely reported what I heard, and then drew a couple conclusions as to why these EO priests, who I assumed knew better, would have made the scandalous emphases they made. I bore no false witness and I didn’t lie, and I forbore divulging their names. I know, however, what I heard.

I do not claim that the Eastern Orthodox churches are in favor of abortion, and I am well aware that there is substantial EO presence in the pro-life movement, for which I am very grateful and thank God.

My post merely underlined the valid points that “rjs1” made early today in post #254 of this thread. Essentially he had said that today’s Eastern Orthodox do indeed have a doctrinally-compromised position on several controversial issues, and that he already saw this as an Anglican. In previous posts I have referred to this as EO doctrinal “befuddlement”, as you know, and on other threads I have established that there is such befuddlement with regard to contraception, divorce and remarriage, and purgatory, just for a start.

So, while I respect your presentation here of good evidence for strong EO oppostion to abortion there is also evidence for waffling by some EO’s. This is very destructive of your claim that there is an EO doctrinal position vis-a-vis abortion (or, indeed, vis-a-vis many other issues) because there is no place ultimately for the buck to stop. There is no organ in the EO churches that can put an end ot debate.

Regards,
Joannes
Fr Ambrose:

This is all totally silly and you may be in the unenviable position of bearing false witness.

There are threads on this Forum which address the Orthodox teaching on abortion. They deal with every aspect of of it, up to and including the recent statement of the Moscow Patriarchate that it is the most heinous of sins.

The Metropolitan of the Orthodox Church in America led, as he does each year, the Orthodox faithful in the recent Right to Life March in the US capital.

There is far too much evidence, including dozens of websites which I can supply, to try and assert that the Orthodox allow abortion.

The only exceptions are the same as you have in the Catholic Church when the abortion is a secondary effect. Abortions which take place because of an otherwise lawful medical procedure that is required to save the life of the mother (e.g., chemotherapy, hysterectomy of a cancerous uterus) are given an exception from the canons under the principle of “double effect.”

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Maccabees,

That is a truly sad and diabolical state of affairs. I wonder what Father A will say in explanation or vindication (if that is even possible).

Dear Father,
Why do you all of a sudden want to end this particular issue when it was you who brought up the issue in the first place? If it is truly irrelevant, why in fact DID you bring up the issue in the first place? And if there IS enough relevance to bring up the issue, why would you now want us to leave the topic?

God bless all,
Greg
P.S. I know some will be tempted to respond, “because Father knows he is wrong.” That is certainly objectively true, but let us not be sarcastic about it.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Maccabees:

Well if I am to trust your own sources father you are lieing it is well documented by the source that you trust CHILDBIRTH BY CHOICE TRUST

Maccabees,

It was not a question of ‘trusting’ that website. It was a question of locating the information on the web.

Since then I have presented you with a Catholic website which contains the same historical information.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Joannes:

, and that he already saw this as an Anglican. In previous posts I have referred to this as EO doctrinal “befuddlement”, as you know, and on other threads I have established that there is such befuddlement with regard to contraception, divorce and remarriage, and purgatory, just for a start.

Befuddlement?

Contraception? Generally discouraged but permitted under certain circumstances, e.g., a couple in their late 40s who have already produced five children, where the wife’s health is failing and further children could endanger her life.

Divorce? One divorce is allowed

Remarriage? A total of three marriaages are allowed

Purgatory? Not an Orthodox teaching.

I don’t see the befuddlement.

Catholic befuddlement?

Divorce? 60,000 annulments granted last year -many of them in fact divorces.

Purgatory? Is it a state or a place or both? Is it for the punishment of venial sins for which temporal punishment has not been paid while alive or is it a cleansing process for the Beatific Vision?

Limbo? Does it exist or is it an erroneous pious myth? When does the papal commission report on this? Doctrine by committee!!

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Maccabees:

Under the heading of Bulgaria the site says the Orthodx church in practice does not oppose abortion especially in catholic areas.

So what you are saying is that in Catholic areas the Catholics want to have access to abortion facilities? But if the Orthodox opposed them the Catholics would not have access to them? Doesn’t say much for the quality of Catholicism among the Bulgarian Catholics.

Why on earth should the Orthodox want to either oppose or support things which concern Catholic areas?

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Father,

With regards to your comment about Fr. John Hardon’s assessment of the abortion issue. Isn’t it the case that before ensoulment, some in the Western Church assumed “abortion” was not abortion? Isn’t it the case that the Catholic Church has ALWAYS defined abortion as the murder of a living being in the womb? If something has no soul, and is not considered alive, can that really be called abortion?

So the Western Church truly would not be guilty of promoting abortion, even in the past, would she? Do you suppose that if these Western Christians realized that ensoulment actually occurred at the moment of conception, they would still allow abortion? THAT is the real question you must ask and answer if you want to prove your point.

THREAD HIJACK!
But I must wonder why this issue of ensoulment is so important all of a sudden. Orthodox have used the argument that St. Thomas Aquinas did not believe in the Immaculate Conception. What THAT contention fails to realize is that Aquinas was one of those who believed in the post-conception ensoulment theory. Thomas believed that Mary was sanctified at the moment of ensoulment, not at the moment of conception. Now, if Aquinas understood that ensoulment occurs AT the moment of conception - VIOLA! - we have Aquinas believing in the Immaculate Conception. Father, now that you are aware of the ensoulment issue, I trust you will NEVER claim that Aquinas did NOT believe in the Immaculate Conception.
God bless,
Greg

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Father,

You write: “Why on earth should the Orthodox want to either oppose or support things which concern Catholic areas?”
Father, you have a habit of really digging a hole for yourself. I pray this is just your own opinion. If this is truly the Orthodox attitude, then EVERYONE WHO HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT SO WILL HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE, AND EVERYONE WHO HAVE ALREADY HAD THE THOUGHT IN THEIR MIND WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REASON TO BELIEVE, WHY THE ORTHODOX CHURCH CAN AND WILL NEVER BE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ESTABLISHED OF JESUS CHRIST.

In opposition to your attitude, which I pray is not the true attitude of the Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church is concerned for the WHOLE WORLD. The Catholic teaching is for the salvation of THE WHOLE WORLD, not just for Catholics. If we labour against abortion, we do so not just for Catholics, but for EVERYONE. If we labour against abuse and poverty and human rights, it is not just for Catholics, but for THE WHOLE WORLD. If you want people to not criticize Orthodox parochialism/jingoism, then may I suggest you keep such comments to yourself.

For the sake of Orthodox Christianity, at least please explain if your statement was your own, or if it represents the general attitude of the Orthodox.

God bless,
Greg

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Joannes:

This is very destructive of your claim that there is an EO doctrinal position vis-a-vis abortion (or, indeed, vis-a-vis many other issues) because there is no place ultimately for the buck to stop. There is no organ in the EO churches that can put an end ot debate.

You’ve not been listening

The primary Canon law against abortion was formulated by Saint Basil the Great and then incorporated into the Canons of an Ecumenical Council. THERE is the organ against which there is NO debate.

“A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction as to its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.”
St. Basil the Great, Three Canonical Letters

And the 91st canon of the Quinisext Ecumenical Council(691 A.D.):

“Those who furnish drugs for the purpose of procuring abortion, and those who take fetus-killing poisons are subject to the penalty prescribed for murderers.”

The same canonical position along with the opinions of individual Church Fathers, were compiled in the Photian Collection which was adopted as the official ecclesiastical law book of the Orthodox Church in 883 A.D.

You may like to look at something which concerns the American situation?

An Orthodox View of Abortion
The Amicus Curiae Submitted to the Supreme CourtNo. 88-605
In The Supreme Court of the United States
October Term, 1988

orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/abortion.aspx

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

GAssisis: You write: “Why on earth should the Orthodox want to either oppose or support things which concern Catholic areas?”

Father, you have a habit of really digging a hole for yourself. I pray this is just your own opinion. If this is truly the Orthodox attitude, then EVERYONE WHO HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT SO WILL HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE, AND EVERYONE WHO HAVE ALREADY HAD THE THOUGHT IN THEIR MIND WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REASON TO BELIEVE, WHY THE ORTHODOX CHURCH CAN AND WILL NEVER BE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ESTABLISHED OF JESUS CHRIST.

In opposition to your attitude, which I pray is not the true attitude of the Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church is concerned for the WHOLE WORLD.

This is unrealistic. Are you saying that we should enter such Catholic areas as Italy or Ireland and show our concern by trying to teach them the Orthodox attitude to, for example, divorce and remarriage. Is that what you expect us to do? And we are now being criticised for not doing that? It’s just not realistic, is it?

But I was saying that I see no reason why the Orthodox would want to impose anything on any Catholic areas of Bulgaria. If the Catholics of Bulgaria wish to practise abortion, that is a great tragedy, but why should the Bulgarian Orthodox step into their areas and oppose them?

It’s quite silly to try and promote the anti-Orthodox nonsense that the Orthodox want to abort Catholic babies. In fact it’s quite an evil suggestion and God forgive those who have made this accusation on this Forum. It’s another all-time low in the Orthodox bashing which goes on here from certain members.

WARNING!! THREAD HIJACKED!!
LET’S TRANSFER THIS TO ANOTHER THREAD!

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

So the Western Church truly would not be guilty of promoting abortion, even in the past, would she? Do you suppose that if these Western Christians realized that ensoulment actually occurred at the moment of conception, they would still allow abortion? THAT is the real question you must ask and answer if you want to prove your point.

I thought that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals?

But his infallibilty is shown to be dependent on the level of biological knowledge of the time. According to Catholic teaching the faith is not in any way dependent on scientific knowledge but it obviously is in this matter of abortion.

So the REAL question hones in on infallibility. How the Popes could allow the sin of abortion because of their scientific ignorance?

The Pope taught, erroneously and in opposition to the Church’s Canon law formulated by an Ecumenical Council, that abortion was permissible up until the 17th week of pregnancy. You see how error can creep in when the Church of Rome was too isolated from the rest of the Church.

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Father,

Let me get this straight, because I am not really understanding this. Are you saying that Catholics are actually ghettoized in Bulgaria and that there are “Catholic” areas in Bulgaria in which Orthodox bishops cannot pass at all? My impression was that Catholics go to the same facilities as any one else if they want to procure an abortion in Bulgaria. Would not Orthodox solicitude for Bulgaria include opposing abortion in ANY circumstances, regardless of race, color or creed? Why can’t their opposition to abortion benefit Catholics?

The REAL sad thing here, Father, is that you have not denied this selective prejudice of the Bulgarian Orthodox when given the chance. Instead, you simply defend it. Sorry, Father, but my respect for you has gone back down one notch (not that it matters).

Until you explain a little further, my comment about the Orthodox Church stands. The Orthodox attitude is certainly not the attitude of Christ. Unless you are willing to criticize the actions of the Bulgarian Orthodox as exposed by the abortion website to which you directed us, your plaintive appeals to your “ecclesiastical law books” are nothing more than hollow platitudes.

With all due respect, please don’t preach to me about being anti-Orthodox. It is YOU who are painting the Orthodox as something less than Christian. I am more than willing to have a good view of my Orthodox brethren. Once again, I ask you to either criticize the Bulgarian Orthodox Church for its selective prejudice, or at least indicate to us that this prejudice is your own, and not symptomatic of Orthodoxy in general.

God bless,
Greg

BTW, Father, Italy and Ireland are CATHOLIC countries. I would apply the exact same principle to a Catholic country as an Orthodox country. In a Catholic country, I would expect the Catholic bishops to work for the benefit of the ENTIRE population, not just for Catholics - just as I would expect the Orthodox bishops to work for the benefit of the ENTIRE population, not just for Orthodox. If I found out that Catholic bishops did not care about the spiritual and social welfare of the Orthodox in a Catholic country, I would certainly be just as critical of those Catholic bishops. Oh- and don’t bother to bring up Catholic sins of the past - sins that the Orthodox also shared in - because as I stated in another thread, I would just consider it hypocrisy and nothing else.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Dear GAssisi,

This is deteriorating rapidly!

The fact is that while the Bulgarian bishops are opposed to the provision of abortion services for Orthodox women, they are not, and cannot be, opposed to the provision of such services to the non-Orthodox, including those Catholic women who want them. After all they are not the legislators of civil law. The Bulgarian Government is.

This has NOTHING to do with Maccabees’ evil allegation that the Orthodox want to kill Catholic babies. It has to do with the human “rights” of Catholic women and others who want an abortion.

The Bulgarian Church, like the Russian Church, is attempting to roll back the effects of the Communist years when abortion was rampant and the only available form of ‘contraception.’ But while it is striving for this aim within its own milieu and within its own righful sphere of authority it must be careful not to trample on the human “rights” of the non-Orthodox citizens who want abortion services.

I don’t intend to write any more on this. The level of Orthodox bashing is far too high.

 

[Therese_Martin]

**Notice:

This thread is now closed. Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.**