Can you tell who in this picture is in full communion with Rome?

[Hesychios]

All I need to know is that every Orthodox since the Great Schism and every Protestant since the Reformation is not in full communion with Rome (or in full communion with God’s Will for that matter).

I realize that for many, this type of logic is what the faith hinges upon. I respect you and I love and respect the others who think like this, but I disagree, here’s why…

Equating God’s Will with communion with Rome is not a foregone conclusion.

It sounds to me like you (and many others, I’ll grant) are making an ‘idol’ of the institution. To me that is as off-base as KJV-onlyism, which make an ‘idol’ of The Book, it’s a form of scrupulosity.

For all the responsibilities argued to be in the purview of the “Petrine ministry”, it has never been shown to be for Peter Alone, exclusive of the other Apostles…nor Roma Alone, exclusive of the other Sees.

It is actually one of the great SOLAs we do not find in scripture:

• Sola Fide
• Sola Scriptura
• Sola Roma

 

[yeshua]

brother Yeshua,

Syriac Orthodox and the Assyrian Church of the East aren’t Catholic… yet.

Peace,

The delineation of ‘Catholic’ on these forums is not emblematic of the reality of the Body of Christ. This is all I will say on the topic out of respect of moderator wishes and forum policy. Thank you.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Good post. But Jesus also wanted Christians to be “one”. Historically, a lot of time and energy has been dedicated to the various causes of division. Each has his own perspective on who is responsible for that, and who might end it. Possibly if the scandal of division did not exist, the world might be a far better place. Certainly the secularists would have a rougher go in imposing their agenda. One doesn’t have to read too many of these threads to see how invested in division many are.

As a Catholic, I certainly have my own, and my Church’s perspective on all of that, and since the whole segment of the forum is dedicated to the details of division and various takes on it, I don’t want to start the whole gigantic thing again here.

Perhaps there is some ultimate good that will come of the divisions within Christianity; divisions that were never inherent and always lamented. But it’s hard to see what good that could be.

I sit here and wonder, my goodness, Anglicans are so very close to Catholicism that it would take them very little to reunite. You sit there and think, gee, if only Rome would accept that we’re part of the same “church” too, with a few minor differences that should be overlooked. The orthodox seem to think if we Catholics would only reject developments of the past thousand years and give up this notion of a Pope, it would all be smooth. Catholics are baffled by that, even more than we are by some Anglicans’ thinking they’re, in effect, Catholics already.

I can’t abandon what my Church teaches for all kinds of reasons; not the least being my feeling that once I did that, I would be as “on my own” as a fundamentalist, and I have little prospect, and much distaste, for “reinventing the theological wheel”. (And no, I don’t want to hear the EO thing about “innovations” here. Plenty of opportunities elsewhere.)

Sometime or other, there is going to be a reunion of Christians. I believe that. Might be a thousand years from now. (Though in the case of many Protestants, I’m not sure it’s that far off.) Likely it won’t be on the terms any of us would suppose at the moment.

And when it comes to writings on the ground, I’m fairly sure Jesus didn’t write my sins there, or He would have required all the football fields in North America for mine alone.

Ridgerunner:

Our Lord wrote one section VERY SMALL so that we could all see our names and a “short list” of our worst sins…

I know the rest of this is off topic, but it is necessary for clarification…

Please remember that I belong to the Traditional Anglican Communion, and that the Bishops in the TAC have been negotiating with the Vatican since 1994 (the negotiations which produced the Union of Brest and united various Eastern Catholics to the Holy See took 30 years).

I can’t give you any more information than that, except to tell you that negotiations are at a very sensitive point and to ask you to pray for a successfull outcome.

The negotiators on boh sides are working with the knowledge that the worldwide Anglican Communion as we know it is breaking apart as we speak, and 100,000’s of “Anglican-Catholics” (Anglicans who consider themselves to be Catholics and who desire some sort of union with Rome) will be looking for a new Ecclesial Home. They also know that it would be easier to “bring them home” with a “familiar liturgy” and if they can stay in their own congregations (the same thing the Eastern Catholics did).

As I said, the negotiations are at an extremely sensitive point, and I’m not allowed to give any more information that that, Please pray that the TAC Bishops will humble themselves and that the Bishops negotiating for the Vatican will show Wisdom, Charity and Grace, and that there will be succussful outcome.

Thank you.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I realize that for many, this type of logic is what the faith hinges upon. I respect you and I love and respect the others who think like this, but I disagree, here’s why…

Equating God’s Will with communion with Rome is not a foregone conclusion.

It sounds to me like you (and many others, I’ll grant) are making an ‘idol’ of the institution. To me that is as off-base as KJV-onlyism, which make an ‘idol’ of The Book, it’s a form of scrupulosity.

For all the responsibilities argued to be in the purview of the “Petrine ministry”, it has never been shown to be for Peter Alone, exclusive of the other Apostles…nor Roma Alone, exclusive of the other Sees.

It is actually one of the great SOLAs we do not find in scripture:

• Sola Fide
• Sola Scriptura
• Sola Roma

Hesychios:

I don’t think any of the Catholics (I understand the Orthodox also claim to be Catholic, but I need to differentiate without using an entire paragraph) would claim “Sola Roma” or Sola Petros". As you would say of many Orthodox doctrinal expressions, it’s much more complicated and nuanced than that.

But that’s not the topic of this thread, and I’m sorry that my Brother has made it such.

The fact that we are not one, and that many Christians nether pray for nor talk to nor care about nor do anything for their borther Christians is a scandal that damages our witness for the Gospel and causes people to turn away from our Lord.

As much as that grieves Him, I don’t think that was the subject of this thread.

I think the O.P wanted to show us what happened when Orthodox and Catholic brothers (in this case-Prelates and Primates) dropped their guard and allowed themselves to love and pray for each other and to work together in the face of common adversity. I think he wanted to show us the grace our Lord poured on that group of Prelates and Primates.

I wonder what would happen if we applied it here, in this country…

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[surgei]

True, but there are no Eastern Orthodox priests without them.

The clean shaven priests are in union with Rome. The bearded ones may or may not be.

That is not true at all.
Yes there is a cannon of practice that requires beards but it is somtimes not followed due to oikonamia.

 

[surgei]

Not sure either, but from what I see, those who are Eastern Catholics have a Roman collar on their cassocks; Orthodox wouldn’t be caught wearing a rassa with a Roman collar.

Metropolitan Herman does.

 

[surgei]

All I need to know is that every Orthodox since the Great Schism and every Protestant since the Reformation is not in full communion with Rome (or in full communion with God’s Will for that matter).

The End.

You are taking traditionalist Catholic perspective here. However if Peter is to be the symbol of unity it is up to Peter to bring unity and not be offensive. It is up to Peter to understand the east not the east to understand Peter. That is if the east have valid sacraments.
I hope you see see the similarity below.
Budism in tibet is cut off from the rest of budism in the world due to the mountains. As a result it has kinda bred with itself over and over and lost the fulness of budist thinking.
In a lot of ways until Maximos IV the Catholic church did the same. That is not saying that Rome lost the fulness of truth. Just the full scope of thinking about the truth.
Drift
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger has said some great things and he said some boneheaded things that he later recanted. your tagline kinda seems like there is no discussion as to how we understand the truth. By the way at all of the councils voting has shown the truth, the will of God as to who the next pope is shown through vote. As he is considered in your view an indespensible part of knowing God’s will on earth, the truth, at least part of the truth, the true pope from the false, is determined by vote.

May the Lord God bless us and bring us to unity.

 

[ronyodish]

I think the O.P wanted to show us what happened when Orthodox and Catholic brothers (in this case-Prelates and Primates) dropped their guard and allowed themselves to love and pray for each other and to work together in the face of common adversity. I think he wanted to show us the grace our Lord poured on that group of Prelates and Primates.

Good thoughts, thanks

Rony

 

[ASimpleSinner]

All of the clean shaven ones are in communion with Rome, as Eastern Orthodoxy requires priests to wear beards.

Unless, per chance, he is the Metropolitan archbishop of the Antiochian Arhdiocese in America. Than you will see his smooth cheeks and (gasp!) his bare head when he wears a black suit & clergy shirt!