Are all theological developments in the West adopted by Easterners Latinizations?

[Seamus_L]

The Latin Church draws heavily from Eastern theologians, (just have a look at Fundamentals Of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott) yet we have this very vocal minority within the Eastern Rite, that favors the purging of everything Latin from the Eastern Churches. There is much the Latin Church can learn from the East and vice versa.

 

[Woodstock]

The Latin Church draws heavily from Eastern theologians, (just have a look at Fundamentals Of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott) yet we have this very vocal minority within the Eastern Rite, that favors the purging of everything Latin from the Eastern Churches. There is much the Latin Church can learn from the East and vice versa.

That doesn’t make sense to me. Here’s how I understand what you’ve said: The beauty of purple draws heavily from blue, yet we have this vocal minority of blues who favor purging everything red from among them, concerned they are becoming purples. They could learn a thing or two from red and improve their blue. They don’t need to worry about becoming purple because purple is great. Purple is the fulfillment of the potential of blue.

If everyone should be a mix of red and blue, everyone would be shades of purple. How could blue add in red without becoming purple? Why, because purple is beautiful in its own right, does it mean that blue is any less beautiful in its own right? What is blue lacking that it needs some red?

 

[surgei]

That doesn’t make sense to me. Here’s how I understand what you’ve said: The beauty of purple draws heavily from blue, yet we have this vocal minority of blues who favor purging everything red from among them, concerned they are becoming purples. They could learn a thing or two from red and improve their blue. They don’t need to worry about becoming purple because purple is great. Purple is the fulfillment of the potential of blue.

If everyone should be a mix of red and blue, everyone would be shades of purple. How could blue add in red without becoming purple? Why, because purple is beautiful in its own right, does it mean that blue is any less beautiful in its own right? What is blue lacking that it needs some red?

Your symbolic representation is great.

 

[Ghosty]

That doesn’t make sense to me. Here’s how I understand what you’ve said: The beauty of purple draws heavily from blue, yet we have this vocal minority of blues who favor purging everything red from among them, concerned they are becoming purples. They could learn a thing or two from red and improve their blue. They don’t need to worry about becoming purple because purple is great. Purple is the fulfillment of the potential of blue.

If everyone should be a mix of red and blue, everyone would be shades of purple. How could blue add in red without becoming purple? Why, because purple is beautiful in its own right, does it mean that blue is any less beautiful in its own right? What is blue lacking that it needs some red?

The logical error in your analogy is that blue (Eastern) wouldn’t be adopting red, but rather purple (Latin).

The point being made is that the Latin Church draws from both Latin Fathers and Eastern Fathers in upholding its own unique tradition.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Woodstock]

The logical error in your analogy is that blue (Eastern) wouldn’t be adopting red, but rather purple (Latin).

The point being made is that the Latin Church draws from both Latin Fathers and Eastern Fathers in upholding its own unique tradition.

Peace and God bless!

Even if your accounting were correct, blue taking on purple would mean blue is taking on blue and red. Blue being the same after taking on blue, it would mean blue is adding red. It would be becoming purple just the same, just in a slower method than taking on straight red.

However, if the Latin Church is purple, having blended heavily from the blue of the East, then the Eastern blue has nothing to learn from the Latin Church but the Western red.

The point being made that because purple has blue in it, blue does not need to adopt purple or red.

 

[Seamus_L]

I never made an analogy to colors, because I prefer to keep it simple, my point was that in defining various doctrines the Latin Church has in instances used the writings of St Basil, St John Chrysostom, St Gregory Nazianzus and others to support a particular theological position. However if we were to apply the same extreme position that a minority within the Eastern Churches advocate, we’d be saying those theologians are not part of our Latin tradition.

 

[ronyodish]

ooh, ooh, can I play? Can we Chaldeans be yellow? :whacky:

Rony

 

[Woodstock]

If the East is Blue, the West is Red, and the Orient Yellow… that would make the Maronites Orange and the Latins Maroon?

 

[ronyodish]

If the East is Blue, the West is Red, and the Orient Yellow… that would make the Maronites Orange and the Latins Maroon?

 

[Alexius]

If the East is Blue, the West is Red, and the Orient Yellow… that would make the Maronites Orange and the Latins Maroon?

 

[surgei]

If the East is Blue, the West is Red, and the Orient Yellow… that would make the Maronites Orange and the Latins Maroon?

What bout the Ethioptics, or they considered a part of the yellow? Do they at least get their own shade of yellow?

 

[Ghosty]

Even if your accounting were correct, blue taking on purple would mean blue is taking on blue and red. Blue being the same after taking on blue, it would mean blue is adding red. It would be becoming purple just the same, just in a slower method than taking on straight red.

However, if the Latin Church is purple, having blended heavily from the blue of the East, then the Eastern blue has nothing to learn from the Latin Church but the Western red.

The point being made that because purple has blue in it, blue does not need to adopt purple or red.

This is of course assuming that each color beyond the “basics” is a blend, and not its own segment of the spectrum of white light. Purple is not a mix of red and blue, but its own segment in between the two.

My question then is, would Latin Radical Traditionalists be considered Ultraviolet?

All kidding aside, we must remember that there was a time when Latin Fathers were not so casually dismissed in the East. St. Ambrose is still revered, and St. Thomas Aquinas was translated into Greek by no less an anti-Western Patriarch of Constantinople. In fact, even St. John Chrysostom (though Eastern himself) was popularized in the West first, and it was in the West that he earned his title “Golden Mouthed” (which was originally recorded in Latin, not Greek).

Any notion of a “purely Eastern” approach, at least among the Byzantines, is a modern revision of what it means to be Byzantine. Of course this is aside from the question of later Latinizations that were brought in to make Byzantines “more Catholic”, which IMO are unhealthy. My point is that it’s too easy to go so far in promoting “true Eastern identity” that some of the authentic Eastern identity gets thrown out as well.

Peace and God bless!

 

[surgei]

This is of course assuming that each color beyond the “basics” is a blend, and not its own segment of the spectrum of white light. Purple is not a mix of red and blue, but its own segment in between the two.

My question then is, would Latin Radical Traditionalists be considered Ultraviolet?

Peace and God bless!

Some of them might be ultraviolent.

 

[Ghosty]

Some of them might be ultraviolent.

This is true. Ironically, the worst Radical Traditionalists I’ve run into personally were frequenting a Byzantine Catholic parish, and were quite proud to call themselves “Latin refugees”. They were extremely pushy about traditional Latin matters (which I found odd to listen to in a Byzantine setting), which made this “Dominican Melkite” a bit uncomfortable to say the least.

Luckily our Melkite community is too “ethnic” to draw such a crowd.

Peace and God bless!

 

[surgei]

This is true. Ironically, the worst Radical Traditionalists I’ve run into personally were frequenting a Byzantine Catholic parish, and were quite proud to call themselves “Latin refugees”. They were extremely pushy about traditional Latin matters (which I found odd to listen to in a Byzantine setting), which made this “Dominican Melkite” a bit uncomfortable to say the least.

Luckily our Melkite community is too “ethnic” to draw such a crowd.

Peace and God bless!

Lucky you are so ethnic. Many of the Churches I went to were not so fortunate.