Are Catholics afraid of Eastern Orthodox?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter_J
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dzheremi said:
If you, as a church, have the fullness of the faith without the errors of those who are outside of your communion, then how can it be anything but “my way or the highway”?
Click to expand...
More like “my way or no deal” (or, for Stephen R. Covey, “win-win or no deal”).
 
ConstantineTG said:
I personally believe that the things we need to achieve unity involves things not part of the Deposit of Faith, thus we can compromise on it. I believe the number 1 reason we are not united is Pride. I’m pretty sure we can compromise on that.
Click to expand...
But it can take quite some time. If and yes…If: God wills it to be so.
 
Hey Alex,

Have you ever heard Fr. Robert Hart’s expression “the two one true churches”?
Alexander_Roman said:
Several times, I have also just been told to join the Orthodox Church.
Click to expand...
If you mean you’ve been told that by Orthodox, then I say: Of course, what else is new? If you mean you’ve been told that by fellow Catholics, then … whoa, that’s a little weird. :winter:
 
In answer to the OP–Afraid?? Heck no! And most Western Catholics I know of don’t even give Orthodoxy or her adherents a first or second thought, let alone fear them. What’s to be afraid of, anyway?
 
MrPip said:
In answer to the OP–Afraid?? Heck no! And most Western Catholics I know of don’t even give Orthodoxy or her adherents a first or second thought, let alone fear them. What’s to be afraid of, anyway?
Click to expand...
Those Western Catholics probably know precious little about the Christian East, Orthodox or EC - so there is no wonder they don’t give it a second, first or any thought at all! They also probably think of them in terms of the RC dogmas they don’t accept.

Now I’m beginning to fear them too . . .

Alex
 
Peter_J said:
You can’t clarify? Or you can’t clarify for another 2 hours?

:hmmm: 🙂

🙂
Click to expand...
I mean “of course not” that a Church’s view on ecumenism is what is keeping me from being Orthodox. I’m not actively seeking to be Orthodox for one thing, but if God needs me among them then I will follow His will.
 
I’m not afraid of them. I may not truely understand the differences between us but I know that we are part of the same Church seperated by important differences but working in the same direction. The schism separated us but we have the same Great- great- great -great grandparents so technically we are family. Family should try and get along and work towards mutual understanding.
 
Peter_J said:
Hey Alex,

Have you ever heard Fr. Robert Hart’s expression “the two one true churches”?

If you mean you’ve been told that by Orthodox, then I say: Of course, what else is new? If you mean you’ve been told that by fellow Catholics, then … whoa, that’s a little weird. :winter:
Click to expand...
Leave it to a Roman Catholic priest to think outside the box! Good for Fr Hart!

Alex
 
kmuestwin said:
I’m not afraid of them. I may not truely understand the differences between us but I know that we are part of the same Church seperated by important differences but working in the same direction. The schism separated us but we have the same Great- great- great -great grandparents so technically we are family. Family should try and get along and work towards mutual understanding.
Click to expand...
I really like you . . . and what is even more, you are from Louisiana, my favourite state!

Alex
 
P.S. This might go without saying, but I’ll say it just in case: my comment in post #59 was in reference to Airplane!:

Rumack: Captain, how soon can you land?
Captain Oveur: I can’t tell.
Rumack: You can tell me. I’m a doctor.
Captain Oveur: No. I mean I’m just not sure.
Rumack: Well, can’t you take a guess?
Captain Oveur: Well, not for another two hours.
Rumack: You can’t take a guess for another two hours?
 
Peter_J said:
P.S. This might go without saying, but I’ll say it just in case: my comment in post #59 was in reference to Airplane!:

Rumack: Captain, how soon can you land?
Captain Oveur: I can’t tell.
Rumack: You can tell me. I’m a doctor.
Captain Oveur: No. I mean I’m just not sure.
Rumack: Well, can’t you take a guess?
Captain Oveur: Well, not for another two hours.
Rumack: You can’t take a guess for another two hours?
Click to expand...
Thanks.

I was a bit lost on that. :o
 
ConstantineTG said:
I personally believe that the things we need to achieve unity involves things not part of the Deposit of Faith, thus we can compromise on it. I believe the number 1 reason we are not united is Pride. I’m pretty sure we can compromise on that.
Click to expand...
I used to believe this myself, so I think I can understand your point of view.

However, since 1870AD the Roman Communion has grafted an idea not from the original Deposit of Faith onto the short list of things which must be believed. Really, there is no ability to compromise until those ideas come off the short list.
 
Hesychios said:
I used to believe this myself, so I think I can understand your point of view.

However, since 1870AD the Roman Communion has grafted an idea not from the original Deposit of Faith onto the short list of things which must be believed. Really, there is no ability to compromise until those ideas come off the short list.
Click to expand...
Aside from the Papal Dogma, what else?
 
dzheremi said:
If you, as a church, have the fullness of the faith without the errors of those who are outside of your communion, then how can it be anything but “my way or the highway”? There’s no compromise to be made on the truth, right?
Click to expand...
However, as with the false accusation of Nestorianism agains the oriental churches, there is the rather embarrassing issue of talking past open another for centuries, while believing the same thing . . .
dzheremi said:
Why would you refrain from joining a church communion with which you agree completely in matters of theology, ecclesiology, praxis, etc. because not all of them share your commitment to ecumenism? I’m probably misunderstanding you, but it seems to me that the modern type of ecumenism is very new, and not considered a cornerstone or expression of any particular church’s unity (so I don’t see why it’s a point against the Orthodox that not all have the same commitment to or opinion on ecumenism).
Click to expand...
there is a basic problem that if an EC were to decide that he should join his mother (or splinter, as the case may be) church, he is generally not able to simply join it, but generally must make explicit denouncements of Rome . . .

hawk
 
ConstantineTG said:
Aside from the Papal Dogma, what else?
Click to expand...
Well there are two Papal dogmas.

But even if it were only one, that would be too many.

I see the concept of universal jursidiction to be in conflict with early church thinking, but that wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t a dogma. As an opinion about a church discipline I’d say it is not at all dangerous. If all the synods of western Europe wanted to voluntarily place themselves under a common patriarch for practical reasons, I’d say that is their prerogative (in that case the bishop of Rome would likely have the best credentials for the job). For them to declare that all other synods must do likewise whether they want to or not is religious politics which can be negotiated, but not necessarily a heresy. But to further declare God intends for it to be that way and we must all believe it or be anathema (as happened in 1870) is from an Orthodox perspective either an honest mistake or a deliberate fabrication.

For an example (bear with me), some people might think that the Secretary General of the United Nations should be the emperor of the world. That some people think such a thing is their right. Each would have his own reasons (some might even think God wants it that way).

It’s ok if people think the United Nations should be a worldwide empire run from New York, those people have a right to their opinion as long as each and every other person has an equal right to their own opinion. It’s even ok if most people around the world think so, then they can mutually decide to make it happen! But to claim that God wants it that way is actually to proclaim a dogma which cannot be shown to be an Apostolic teaching, and that is where a charge of heresy can come from.

Returning the idea of Papal universal jurisdiction to a theological opinion, and removing the claim of dogma for it would free up the RC church to compromise on it. Right now it simply cannot compromise, it is non-negotiable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top