But by YOUR standards, they are not.
Hopefully a reunion can be worked out and I was only indicating some possibilities or suggestions as to what could be done by Roman Catholics without touching upon any infallible doctrinal teaching. Also please see post #119.
Thank you. Yes. I don’t know all of the technicalities on this, but I think that there is also some theological discussion as to the exact moment when the Transubstantiation takes place. In any case. perhaps then, this issue, is one which is or has been already resolved.
The issue of the epiclesis does not touch upon its absence or presence, but merely on its LOCATION in the Eucharistic Liturgy.
I find that in most forums people take the most extreme views for some reason. I inquired about the Filioque to an Orthodox Father that was very anti-unity with reservation he said the Filioque to some theologians was a non Issue, that the real Issue is the Primacy of the seat of Peter.
It is a well known fact that Orthodoxy in former Soviet Union is extremely political.Many priests and sisters of both orthodoxy, and RCC spent time in labor camps and prisons run by the Communists. Now that Russian Orthodoxy is free to express itself as the major religion of that area of the world, there are signs of oppression against non-orthodox Christians.Not that all of Russian Orthodoxy is guilty of those acts, but the political activities of the major See are tightening year by year!The Ethnic Russian Orthodox,along with Romanian,Serbian,Bulgarian orthodox churches are very intolerant of non-Orthodox Christians.
I don’t think that this is true. How much time have you spent in any one of the following countries: Russia, Romania, Serbia, or Bulgaria? Or are you speaking from ignorance and not having lived there at all?
I’m not at all sure of Serbia and Bulgaria, but it’s possible that brother Ugaro is basing his views on newreports about 1) the ROC making a big stink about the Catholic Church setting up dioceses to serve its own people in Russia, and 2) the Romanian Orthodox Church refusing to give Catholic back their churches that were stolen from the Catholics during WWII.
We’re working on 18 and 21. 27 is simply untrue, and 12 seems really overly finnicky. Icons are painted and paint has thickness, however small, thus making all paintings 3-dimensional. Unless the disagreement is that a chisel is used in "engraving, and a chisel is used in marble statues, therefore statues must be graven images.
), but wouldn’t the same thing then be true for the Eastern Orthodox? What makes their date for Easter the correct one? Why shouldn’t Mary be pictured alone? Why shouldn’t priests be of the higher state of celibacy?In fairness to Bob, it’s not his list and he provided it as a service to this discussion. I think it is a random collection of comments compiled by someone from things read around the internet, and does not represent anything like what SCOBA would present to the USCCB, or anything like that. It amounts to range of what some see as serious doctrinal issues and others might have commented on as a pet peeve of some sort, or minor concern. They are not categorized or listed in order of importance, and a few might be really just differences but not problems.We’re working on 18 and 21. 27 is simply untrue, and 12 seems really overly finnicky. Icons are painted and paint has thickness, however small, thus making all paintings 3-dimensional. Unless the disagreement is that a chisel is used in "engraving, and a chisel is used in marble statues, therefore statues must be graven images.
You know, a lot of these things are things that are not infallible dogma for the Roman Catholic (and assumedly for the Eastern Catholic too
We’re working on 18 and 21.
These are internal matters for your church. How they made the list I don’t know, but I presume that there were some conservative Latin Catholics who mentioned these kind of things as part of their disillusionment. Little things like that propel people out of the church in every direction, and some might have approached Orthodoxy. People are funny, who knows…the first person to mention it on the internet might actually be a Latin Catholic again by now!
But honestly, Orthodox do learn about the kind of things in article #18 and realize that the exercise of Papal authority has not prevented this nonsense. It undermines arguments in support of Papal authority.
Orthodox, having a decentralized authority does not seem to encounter these kind of problems. It’s a mystery.
Perhaps, but I think that there is a Papal quote out there stating exactly that. People are fond of quoting past Popes to prove some point or another, until one of these embarrassing *faux pas *shows up, then it is denied as a teaching. Sorry, I don’t know where I read it and I am not interested in arguing the point. I will accept that the Latin Catholic church does not teach that “the Pope holds the place of Almighty God on this earth” based upon your testimony.
This is not worth your time or mine.
There is a theology about icons and their use, statuary cannot be used in that way and there are plenty of eastern Catholics who read here who can elaborate on it.
Good questions.You know, a lot of these things are things that are not infallible dogma for the Roman Catholic (and assumedly for the Eastern Catholic too
For Easter, why not propose: “we need to reach a compromise” or “we are open to further study on the subject” or something like that. What is always said is “we need a common date for Easter” and nothing more as if that helps, it does not. Make a concrete proposal and wait for a response, it sounds for all the world like an accusatory “we need a common date for Easter…and it’s your fault!”
I don’t know who is to blame or why. Good subject for another thread.
Saints are depicted with symbolism for what they have done. All saints are given an image of their life and work, or their martyrdom.
Mary is the Mother of God, that is simply what she has done. Everything else is simply too iffy and potentially implies too much about her. There are exceptions in Orthodox iconography but they are not the norm.
Orthodox have no problem whatsoever with clerical celibacy. We honor it. But mandatory celibacy is unhistorical and unnecessary, there never was a time when the eastern Catholic churches (now Orthodox) had mandatory celibacy.
For your church it’s OK, we don’t care, But we know that the Supreme Pontiffs imposed mandatory celibacy upon Orthodox groups that came under their control. We reject their explanations for it and know they were wrong to do this. Thus, we fully expect that if we are ever in a situation where some kind of Pope controlled us, it would be imposed again on the rest of us.
If that sounds like we don’t trust the office of the papacy to respect us in the future, well that’s exactly right. Popes are claimed to have full universal authority in the church and any future one who attains that high office could unpredictably do what past Popes have already done to other Orthodox.
One can see that this is a small matter that can really be an obstacle to future reconciliation.
Michael
I will address here the statement made that 27 is “simply untrue.”
This might point out a difference in perspective between Christians in the two Churches. In one Church, (RCC), there is no prohibition against statues as being graven images, however, in the other Church (EO), the norm is to use icons as it is believed by many in the EO Church that statues are not in the spirit of the prohibition against graven images.
Why do you keep bringing this up? I already answered this elsewhere. BTW, Vatican II says that EVERY bishop holds the place of God on earth. This is nothing more than what St. Ignatius taught a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time ago. It’s just sheer hypocrisy to complain that the Pope stated it.
Because in post #124 Spirithound says that this is simply untrue.
Recall that 27 was the teaching that the Pope holds the place of Almighty God on earth.
It would be untrue in what I would consider a normal reading of the point. All bishops and indeed priests stand in persona Christi when they’re administering the sacraments.
The Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894, as reported in The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII, p. 304, Benziger Brothers (1903) is pretty clear on this point:
Forgive me, brother Bob. I did not pay attention to the context. In that case, I would like to ask brother Spirithound: