Cardinal Kasper to meet with Russian Orthodox Patriarch

[bobzills]

Dear brother Bob,

Can you please stop using the collective term “Catholic?” It seems obvious that what you really mean is “Latin Catholic” (Certainly, many of the things on that list do not apply to the Eastern and Oriental Churches). I am not Latin Catholic, and I hope and pray that the Latin Catholic Church does not give up their identity as Latin Catholics just to promote unity, because that would be a false unity.

Blessings,
Marduk

Correct.
Asking your kind indulgence, let me rephrase it as follows:
So it is your opinion then that the authorities of the Western Roman Catholic Church will not budge one bit along the lines listed above to promote a reunion?

 

[bobzills]

Why? If you know what these few items are, then list them all.

Well, first of all, I would rather have a full discussion of the points raised already. And secondly, some of the other items might be somewhat repetitious of what has been mentioned before, for example, there is the Orthodox objection raised to the Catholic claim that the Pope holds the place of Almighty God on earth.

 

[Peter_J]

JackQ, I agree with you in part. There are some areas in which neither Catholics nor Orthodox are willing to compromise. Take Papal Infallibility, for example; each side says to the other, reunion can only take place as long as you accept our position.

There’s not going to be reunion as far as the Orthodox churches are concerned.

On one level, that does seem like a necessary, maybe even obvious, conclusion. If neither side is willing to “budge” on the issue of Papal Infallibility, then no reconciliation is possible, right?

However, both sides do believe that reconciliation is possible – they just disagree on the conditions under which it could take place. (Even Bishop Hilarion, who’s a pretty hard-core realist, see this thread, didn’t say that reconciliation between Catholics and Orthodox is impossible, but only that it is “intractable”.)

God bless,
Peter.

 

[Chellow]

Well, first of all, I would rather have a full discussion of the points raised already. And secondly, some of the other items might be somewhat repetitious of what has been mentioned before, for example, there is the Orthodox objection raised to the Catholic claim that the Pope holds the place of Almighty God on earth.

With all the points you listed the only difference between the Orthodox and Catholic is that the Catholic Church takes a position and answer on all the items on your list while the Orthodox hold everything as a mystery and see no need to answer them. That’s why as a Catholic I would make a good Orthodox and accept all their teaching, me think. :whacky:

 

[tdgesq]

Well, first of all, I would rather have a full discussion of the points raised already.

To what end? So that some issues can be resolved but not others, leaving us right back in the some position in which we started out. You were the one who said that there were a “few” key issues upon which it seems the RCC won’t budge. Yet you seem incapable or unwilling to list them. Very curious.

And secondly, some of the other items might be somewhat repetitious of what has been mentioned before, for example, there is the Orthodox objection raised to the Catholic claim that the Pope holds the place of Almighty God on earth.

If it’s repetitious then there isn’t any need to double itemize it. Nobody asked you to do that. I see we have the shadowy “there is the Orthodox objection” again. If these are your objections, then just come out and say it. Hiding behind the hypothetical or real “other Orthodox poster” doesn’t let anybody here know whether you believe these are items that the RCC should budge on. If you think Cardinal Kasper should compromise in some way on some or all of these issues, then out with it.

What are the issues upon which Kasper should compromise in his meeting with the ROC Patriarch?

By the way, it does look unlikely that there will be a compromise on anything so long as the ROC continues to unreasonably withdraw from ecumenical talks because they have a jurisdictional dispute with another Orthodox delegation.

 

[bobzills]

You were the one who said that there were a “few” key issues upon which it seems the RCC won’t budge. Yet you seem incapable or unwilling to list them. .

Perhaps you missed post number 67 in this thread. Is the RCC willing to budge on any of the 25 issues mentioned there?
If you want, I can list them again here:

1. the doctrine of papal infallibility.
2. the Pope with administrative control over all bishops, including those of the East.
3. the Pope as not subject to a council of bishops.
4. the filioque
5. purgatory
6. indulgences
7. the “immaculate conception.”
8. original sin
9. baptism by sprinkling
10. Christians are not married by a priest, but by each other.
11. unleavened bread used for the Eucharist
12. use of statues (violation of prohibition against graven images).
13. denial of need for epiclesis in the Eucharist
14. celibacy for priests
15. development of doctrine.
16. separating the Mystery of Chrismation from the Mystery of Baptism.
17. juridical and legalistic view of salvation
18. Halloween Masses, clown Masses, Dracula Masses, balloon Masses, Chines dragon Masses, charismatic Masses, etc.
19. Organ music, guitar music, and other instrumental music played during the liturgy
20. fasting of only one hour before receiving Holy Communion
21. mistranslation of “for many” as “for all”
22. Communion Services conducted by female ministers
23. Catholics do not recognize St. Photius as a Saint.
24. Method of calculating date for Easter
25. Acquiring an Orthodox phronema.
    And I added the portrayal of Mary with Her Divine Son, and not alone.
    And further, the teaching that the Pope holds the place of Almiighty God on this earth.

 

[tdgesq]

Perhaps you missed post number 67 in this thread. Is the RCC willing to budge on any of the 25 issues mentioned there?

Not an answer to my question. Please list all of them. There are only a few. Why do you continue to resist listing all of them so I can address them? It does no good to list only some of them. We will be right back where we started. Why won’t you just list all of them? You said there were only a few.

Then tell me which ones you believe that Cardinal Kasper should compromise on. It makes no sense for me or anyone else to say whether the RCC would be willing to budge on them if you don’t believe it should. Which ones should Kasper budge on?

 

[Hesychios]

With all the points you listed the only difference between the Orthodox and Catholic is that the Catholic Church takes a position and answer on all the items on your list while the Orthodox hold everything as a mystery and see no need to answer them. That’s why as a Catholic I would make a good Orthodox and accept all their teaching, me think. :whacky:

I know that you were being a bit facetious.

But there really is something to what you say. I probably will have a difficult time explaining my thoughts on this subject, so I hope you can bear with me.

In the first place, there is an awful great deal of room for theological opinion. Some ideas are just not necessary for salvation.

But we human creatures are fond of speculating, and we can come up with all kind of opinions on everything from what color eyes our Savior had to how old His mother was when He was born or whether she suffered labor pains at His birth. That kind of thing is not really important, until you make it a dogma, which then, can damn people who disagree.

I think what is forgotten here is that apophatic reasoning ( the predominant eastern and early mode of thinking) does not build up long lists of mandatory beliefs, it reduces to essentials, ie Jesus Christ is God Incarnate, that sort of thing.

In that respect then, one can believe a lot of things as opinions so long as they are not harmful to the core belief system. Once these theological opinions are imposed under threat of anathema as if they are true, they become a means to unnecessarily deny good people salvation, and that is wrong.

So when some office of the church declares something like “all Christians must believe that Saint Mary suffered no pain at childbirth under threat of anathema” or on some other equally obscure points of fact what we are doing is placing a totally unnecessary bar in the way of the practice of the Gospel.

Christ did not take the nails for a system designed to exclude the innocent, He came to save.

 

[bobzills]

Why do you continue to resist listing all of them so I can address them?

I thought I gave a list already? If you want, I can list them again here so that you can address them:

1. the doctrine of papal infallibility.
2. the Pope with administrative control over all bishops, including those of the East.
3. the Pope as not subject to a council of bishops.
4. the filioque
5. purgatory
6. indulgences
7. the “immaculate conception.”
8. original sin
9. baptism by sprinkling
10. Christians are not married by a priest, but by each other.
11. unleavened bread used for the Eucharist
12. use of statues (violation of prohibition against graven images).
13. denial of need for epiclesis in the Eucharist
14. celibacy for priests
15. development of doctrine.
16. separating the Mystery of Chrismation from the Mystery of Baptism.
17. juridical and legalistic view of salvation
18. Halloween Masses, clown Masses, Dracula Masses, balloon Masses, Chines dragon Masses, charismatic Masses, etc.
19. Organ music, guitar music, and other instrumental music played during the liturgy
20. fasting of only one hour before receiving Holy Communion
21. mistranslation of “for many” as “for all”
22. Communion Services conducted by female ministers
23. Catholics do not recognize St. Photius as a Saint.
24. Method of calculating date for Easter
25. Acquiring an Orthodox phronema.
    And I added the portrayal of Mary with Her Divine Son, and not alone.
    And further, the teaching that the Pope holds the place of Almiighty God on this earth.

 

[tdgesq]

I thought I gave a list already? If you want, I can list them again here so that you can address them:

1. the doctrine of papal infallibility.
2. the Pope with administrative control over all bishops, including those of the East.
3. the Pope as not subject to a council of bishops.
4. the filioque
5. purgatory
6. indulgences
7. the “immaculate conception.”
8. original sin
9. baptism by sprinkling
10. Christians are not married by a priest, but by each other.
11. unleavened bread used for the Eucharist
12. use of statues (violation of prohibition against graven images).
13. denial of need for epiclesis in the Eucharist
14. celibacy for priests
15. development of doctrine.
16. separating the Mystery of Chrismation from the Mystery of Baptism.
17. juridical and legalistic view of salvation
18. Halloween Masses, clown Masses, Dracula Masses, balloon Masses, Chines dragon Masses, charismatic Masses, etc.
19. Organ music, guitar music, and other instrumental music played during the liturgy
20. fasting of only one hour before receiving Holy Communion
21. mistranslation of “for many” as “for all”
22. Communion Services conducted by female ministers
23. Catholics do not recognize St. Photius as a Saint.
24. Method of calculating date for Easter
25. Acquiring an Orthodox phronema.
    And I added the portrayal of Mary with Her Divine Son, and not alone.
    And further, the teaching that the Pope holds the place of Almiighty God on this earth.

Is that all of them Bob?

 

[JackQ]

So it is true, then, that Catholics will not budge one bit to promote a reunion along the lines listed above?

You are not responding to the question I put to you. I asked you a question, and you responded with another one. So, I’ll ask again. Are you prepared to renounce the dogmas mentioned for the sake of unity?

 

[bobzills]

You are not responding to the question I put to you. I asked you a question, and you responded with another one. So, I’ll ask again. Are you prepared to renounce the dogmas mentioned for the sake of unity?

Sorry, but I don;t understand the R. Catholic objection to many of these points. For one example, why object to a common date for Easter? It seems like it would be better for all Christians to celebrate Easter on the same date as calculated by the Eastern Orthodox Church? Why is there no will to budge on this important issue?

 

[mardukm]

Sorry, but I don;t understand the R. Catholic objection to many of these points. For one example, why object to a common date for Easter? It seems like it would be better for all Christians to celebrate Easter on the same date as calculated by the Eastern Orthodox Church? Why is there no will to budge on this important issue?

I can answer that one:

Because in the third century, it was decided by the whole Church that each particular province can decide FOR ITSELF their own Easter date.

Catholics don’t want to violate Sacred Tradition. Simple as that.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[bobzills]

I can answer that one:

Because in the third century, it was decided by the whole Church that each particular province can decide FOR ITSELF their own Easter date.

Catholics don’t want to violate Sacred Tradition. Simple as that.

Blessings,
Marduk

Really? Catholics don’t want to violate tradition and agree to a common date for Easter? That probably would have been news to Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II who expressed a desire for a common date for Easter, but did not agree to the general method of calculation for it, as used by most of the Eastern Orthodox Churches.
wcc-coe.org/wcc/what/faith/easter2001-03-e.html

 

[mardukm]

Really? Catholics don’t want to violate tradition and agree to a common date for Easter? That probably would have been news to Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II who expressed a desire for a common date for Easter, but did not agree to the general method of calculation for it, as used by most of the Eastern Orthodox Churches.
wcc-coe.org/wcc/what/faith/easter2001-03-e.html

Please forgive me for that post. I don’t know how it happened, since I was still on the (name removed by moderator)ut screen. I almost pressed the submit button, but all of a sudden remembered that the Nicene Council made a ruling on it. I decided to research it more before posting and pressed the back button, but I guess it must have gotten through somehow (my touchpad is really sensitive, and I may have brushed against it).

Please disregard my post.

Blessings

 

[bobzills]

Please forgive me for that post. I don’t know how it happened, since I was still on the (name removed by moderator)ut screen. I almost pressed the submit button, but all of a sudden remembered that the Nicene Council made a ruling on it. I decided to research it more before posting and pressed the back button, but I guess it must have gotten through somehow (my touchpad is really sensitive, and I may have brushed against it).

Please disregard my post.

Blessings

Hi mardukm:
I’ve done the same thing many times over again. Obviously the internet is not the ideal medium for communication, although it does have some advantages.
Anyway, to get back to the topic at hand, my point was simply that we hear many times that R. Catholics want to have reunion with the E. Orthodox Church. But there are many things that can be done by the RCC to promote reunion and many of these would not involve any infallible doctrine or dogma. But the RCC is reluctant to make the slightest move in that direction, while still asserting strongly in favor of a reunion. Something seems amiss with such an approach.
For example, I don;t see where any doctrine would be involved if the RCC were to change the calculation of the date of Easter and agree to the calculation used by the majority of the Orthodox Christians? Nor do I see where any infallible doctrine would be involved if Mary were to be invariably depicted with her Divine Son in her arms, and not alone? Why would there be any problem in using leavened bread?

 

[tdgesq]

Please forgive me for that post. I don’t know how it happened, since I was still on the (name removed by moderator)ut screen. I almost pressed the submit button, but all of a sudden remembered that the Nicene Council made a ruling on it. I decided to research it more before posting and pressed the back button, but I guess it must have gotten through somehow (my touchpad is really sensitive, and I may have brushed against it).

Please disregard my post.

Blessings

There is nothing to forgive on your part madukm:

The following is not found in the latin text, but is found in the greek text :

We also send you the good news of the settlement concerning the holy pasch, namely that in answer to your prayers this question also has been resolved. All the brethren in the East who have hitherto followed the Jewish practice will henceforth observe the custom of the Romans and of yourselves and of all of us who from ancient times have kept Easter together with you. Rejoicing then in these successes and in the common peace and harmony and in the cutting off of all heresy, welcome our fellow minister, your bishop Alexander, with all the greater honour and love. He has made us happy by his presence, and despite his advanced age has undertaken such great labour in order that you too may enjoy peace.

Pray for us all that our decisions may remain secure through almighty God and our lord Jesus Christ in the holy Spirit, to whom is the glory for ever and ever. Amen. piar.hu/councils/ecum01.htm

Well, there it is in Nicaea I, the very first ecumenical council. It is clearly a church law though, not a divine law. It can be changed.

But that isn’t what this is all about. If you ,bobzills, want to know what concessions are available, then you need to state clearly what you believe they ought to be. If you think the ROC will be reasonable on these matters whereas the RCC will not, then think again. The issue of the Julian and Gregorian calendar is something that should have been put to bed long ago, not for lack of the RCC trying.

 

[JackQ]

Sorry, but I don;t understand the R. Catholic objection to many of these points. For one example, why object to a common date for Easter? It seems like it would be better for all Christians to celebrate Easter on the same date as calculated by the Eastern Orthodox Church? Why is there no will to budge on this important issue?

Okay, I’ll ask it again. Are you willing, as a Catholic, to renounce the following for the sake of unity:

1. The doctrine that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son;
2. Papal Infallibility as defined in Vatican I;
3. The Immaculate Conception;
4. The use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist as a legitimate practice for the Latin rite;
5. Catholic teaching on divorce and remarriage, and
6. Purgatory.

It’s a simple question, really. Are you prepared to renounce these things?

 

[mardukm]

Nor do I see where any infallible doctrine would be involved if Mary were to be invariably depicted with her Divine Son in her arms, and not alone?

I let my Filipina wife read this, and she said, “this guy must be really ignorant of the Catholic Church.” The fact is, in the Philippines, Spain, and Latin-American countries, there is a great devotion to BOTH the Santo Nino, and the blessed Virgin. The image of the Divine Son in the arms of the Blessed Mother is quite prevalent in these countries.

Why would there be any problem in using leavened bread?

There isn’t, which is why Eastern and Oriental Catholics who use unleavened bread are in communion with Latin and Armenian Catholics who use unleavened bread.

Brother Bob. TRUST ME ON THIS ONE - unity at the expense of the unique identity of one of the partners is a FALSE and EVIL type of unity. I feel strongly about this because I have too often experienced Eastern Orthodox try to proselytize Coptic Orthodox, trying to convince us to lose our Oriental heritage in favor of the Eastern Traditions and ways of thinking. I can confidently assert that all my Eastern and Oriental Catholic berthren feel the same way as they have experienced the bad effects of Latinizations.

What is your own perspective? Please just lay it out by answering the following question:

Do you believe that losing one’s unique religious identity is a better way to unity than trying to understand and accept the differences?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[bobzills]

I let my Filipina wife read this, and she said, “this guy must be really ignorant of the Catholic Church.” The fact is, in the Philippines, Spain, and Latin-American countries, there is a great devotion to BOTH the Santo Nino, and the blessed Virgin. The image of the Divine Son in the arms of the Blessed Mother is quite prevalent in these countries.

Here’s the point I was trying to make:
In the Eastern Orthodox tradition, the Mother of God is invariably depicted with her Divine Son in her arms. Yes, the Roman Catholic tradition allows this, but does not insist upon it. More often than not, we see statues of the Mother of God alone, without her Divine Son in her arms. Why would it be against any doctrine for the RCC to change and adhere to the Eastern teaching that the Mother of God should be depicted with her Divine Son in her arms, and not alone?
And why would it be against any doctrine to promote visual images of Mary with the exclusive use of icons? Once again the RCC does allow the use of icons, but does not insist upon it.