Catholic and Orthodox

[dzheremi]

Of course it is, it can be nothing else. And hard headed Catholic’s will ague all day with hardheaded members of the EO and the end its NOTHING is resolved. Your not winning any arguments here, you merely participating in them. In the end you leave the same way you came.

No. We’re not even having arguments. We’re stating facts. It is a fact that you cannot love the schism away. Catholics and Orthodox already love each other (most of them do, anyway), and yet they are no closer to reunion as a result.

When Love truly exists than this thinking will cease to exist.

So you’re telling me you’ve never met a loving Orthodox person? True love does not exist between the Churches? Or are you of the opinion that love is only true when it overlooks all the errors that keep Rome from holding the same faith as the Orthodox? (i.e., keeps reunion from being a reality)

I don’t think that’s love at all.

Survival and Christianity is the issue.

No it isn’t. The Orthodox have been surviving and being Christian without Rome for 1000-1500 years and counting. The issue is the content of the faith.

Love and fear do not co-exist and its fear your acting on. You fear your church will become compromised

No I don’t, though if I did it would be a reasonable fear (cf. the Eastern and Oriental parts of the Roman communion). But no, I don’t fear that at all. Believe me, if anyone is going to compromise the Coptic Orthodox Church it will be the Copts themselves, not Rome. There are so few Catholics in Egypt it’s really a non-issue. Only in the diaspora (> 10% of all Copts) are there these kinds of issues, and they don’t come up as a result of some sort of attraction to or meddling from Rome, but from the youth being attracted to Protestantism because they now live in Protestant countries.

you fear things will change

I don’t fear change. I trust that the bishops of the Orthodox church know what they’re doing. I should think if anyone fears change, it is Roman Catholics, given their large “traditionalist” sector who would like to bring things back to the times before the Vatican II reforms. Maybe you are projecting here.

you fear authority

What? No I don’t. Now that I am in the southwest, I am under HG Bishop David, whom I love, and I love all the other bishops, too. Bishop Musa, Bishop Suriel, HH Pope Shenouda III…all amazing examples of Christian leadership and, yes, Christian love. Why would I fear their authority? There’s no reason to fear it.

And I don’t fear Rome’s authority either, since it doesn’t have any in the Orthodox church.

We can’t stand another 45-million martyed this century.

Egypt has, by most accounts, produced more martyrs than any one particular church in the world. So many, in fact, that the Coptic calendar counts the years by “A.M.”, meaning “Anno Martyrum”, or “Year of the Martyrs”, with reference to the beginning of the Diocletian persecutions in Egypt. And it still produces many, many martyrs (see: El Kosheh, Imbaba, etc.), and will produce many, many more. Can we “stand” it? Well…is the holy church still there after 2,000 years or not? According to Attwater’s “Eastern Catholic Worship”, in 1945 (the date of publication) there were less than a million Copts in Egypt, including Catholics and Orthodox. Now there are 8 to 12 million Coptic Orthodox, 90% of whom in Egypt. (Wikipedia says 10 to 20, but all the actual Coptic sources I’ve read that are not from advocacy groups say 8 to 12.)

Somehow Christians are entertaining the illusion that their particular church will rise to world leadership. Thats an illusion and I don’t see it.

Yeah, that most definitely IS an illusion, but on your part, not anyone else’s. I definitely don’t see that on the side of the Orthodox (whether EO or OO). It is the Roman Catholics who claim to have a bishop whose leadership is over the whole world. Again, I think you are projecting.

We need to get our act together before its to late.

What was all that stuff you wrote above about me being full of fear?

 

[jam070406]

I should think if anyone fears change, it is Roman Catholics, given their large “traditionalist” sector who would like to bring things back to the times before the Vatican II reforms.

Large??

 

[searn77]

I wish that you would elaborate. Are you, an Orthodox old-calendarist, in communion with new-calendar Orthodox. Not all are. Those that are not presumably see themselves as not having the exact same faith as other Orthodox.

As an Old Calendarist Orthodox, I am not in communion with the New Calendarist Orthodox. Although there are still those in the New Calendarist Orthodox Church who follow the Julian (Old) calendar, they are never called Old Calendarists. Originally the term “Old Calendarist” was used as a sort of slur against us but today it’s just used for clarification.

It is not useful to talk about " exact same faith" without much more detail. In particular it is necessary be differentiate among dogma, theological opinion, pious legend, disciplines, and traditional practice in this exactitude.

I agree, that is necessary. I do not wish to discuss it here myself because honestly I’ve been extremely busy with various things. But I do agree with you that it is very important to differentiate between all of what you said so that people do not confuse faith with traditions.

Visiting an Orthodox forum? One such has a recent thread that includes a long list of everything the CC must do before communion with the EOC. It includes many elements that are accepted in EOC. And it pays no heed to the progress in mutual understanding of theological questions that is being made in joint commissions.

I’m sure you’ll find opinions and beliefs there that you don’t accept. I find many on here and on Orthodox forums that I do not accept. I was just suggesting visiting and participating in an Orthodox forum so that you can get a better understanding of how the Orthodox view various topics, as you’ll get more of an Orthodox POV there and more of a Catholic POV here.

I do agree with you that visiting a parish is a great idea. I am a regular at an EO parish. My Russian Orthodox brother in law has spent a lot of time at GC services. We share the opinion the the lack of inter-communion is senseless.

Again without criteria and norms of “the same” this comment has no meaning. Antionchians and Russians are not the same. By the same token, East and West were not the same in 600AD. Communion doesn’t require sameness.

But the faith was the same in 600 AD. When I said we need to be “the same” I was referring to the faith.

 

[GaryTaylor]

No. We’re not even having arguments. We’re stating facts. It is a fact that you cannot love the schism away. Catholics and Orthodox already love each other (most of them do, anyway), and yet they are no closer to reunion as a result.:

Why? Because of the NO. NO, NO. NO, attutude. When the list is complete we’ll talk. I say get here with an open mind and we could make this happen. To me its just that simple. Then what ever is wrong I guess after talking about it day in and day out for awhile, we’ll come to an agreement

So you’re telling me you’ve never met a loving Orthodox person? True love does not exist between the Churches? Or are you of the opinion that love is only true when it overlooks all the errors that keep Rome from holding the same faith as the Orthodox? (i.e., keeps reunion from being a reality):

Of course I have, and they are not the issue, its the stubborn, obstinate attutude which I’m taken back by.

I don’t think that’s love at all.:

Listen correct Love is I’ll be you friend but I won’t accept your negativity, responsible, love and concern. Thats not locking your brother out of the house and saying when you act as I say you can come in. Whats the point? We are not talking significant reason to not act out of love and make this effort to get this together? Do you actually think an honest effort has been made to make this happen? You and I probly talked more the last year than the church’s did in 50.

No it isn’t. The Orthodox have been surviving and being Christian without Rome for 1000-1500 years and counting. The issue is the content of the faith.:

My brother, everyone survived, so what does that say? Can we survive another x-amount of years without being reduced to God onlys know what?

No I don’t, though if I did it would be a reasonable fear (cf. the Eastern and Oriental parts of the Roman communion). But no, I don’t fear that at all. Believe me, if anyone is going to compromise the Coptic Orthodox Church it will be the Copts themselves, not Rome. There are so few Catholics in Egypt it’s really a non-issue. Only in the diaspora (> 10% of all Copts) are there these kinds of issues, and they don’t come up as a result of some sort of attraction to or meddling from Rome, but from the youth being attracted to Protestantism because they now live in Protestant countries:

Right, but we are talking some difference’s now that could also change. And most definatly needs to change.You and I knew Egypt was gone to begin with the Islam situation. And were watching it come to its fruition. A darn shame to be right wasn’t it.
.

I don’t fear change. I trust that the bishops of the Orthodox church know what they’re doing. I should think if anyone fears change, it is Roman Catholics, given their large “traditionalist” sector who would like to bring things back to the times before the Vatican II reforms. Maybe you are projecting here.:

I don’t fear it either. I say, lets make it happen. No, and actually I believe the CC see’s the need to stabilize as the EO has. Its a win/win situation to me.

What? No I don’t. Now that I am in the southwest, I am under HG Bishop David, whom I love, and I love all the other bishops, too. Bishop Musa, Bishop Suriel, HH Pope Shenouda III…all amazing examples of Christian leadership and, yes, Christian love. Why would I fear their authority? There’s no reason to fear it. :

Right, but aren’t we talking about something different here?

And I don’t fear Rome’s authority either, since it doesn’t have any in the Orthodox church.:

There doesn’t need to be, its primacy and it confused in peoples minds.

Egypt has, by most accounts, produced more martyrs than any one particular church in the world. So many, in fact, that the Coptic calendar counts the years by “A.M.”, meaning “Anno Martyrum”, or “Year of the Martyrs”, with reference to the beginning of the Diocletian persecutions in Egypt. And it still produces many, many martyrs (see: El Kosheh, Imbaba, etc.), and will produce many, many more. Can we “stand” it? Well…is the holy church still there after 2,000 years or not? According to Attwater’s “Eastern Catholic Worship”, in 1945 (the date of publication) there were less than a million Copts in Egypt, including Catholics and Orthodox. Now there are 8 to 12 million Coptic Orthodox, 90% of whom in Egypt. (Wikipedia says 10 to 20, but all the actual Coptic sources I’ve read that are not from advocacy groups say 8 to 12.):

I’m not counting who’s losing more. Just overall numbers, and their ugly.

Yeah, that most definitely IS an illusion, but on your part, not anyone else’s. I definitely don’t see that on the side of the Orthodox (whether EO or OO). It is the Roman Catholics who claim to have a bishop whose leadership is over the whole world. Again, I think you are projecting.:

You thinking authority again, I’m talkin communion and Biblically putting the church together.

What was all that stuff you wrote above about me being full of fear?

Its called Responible Love and Concern You alright? Maybe it is me projecting and hoping for a better day.

Peace

 

[dvdjs]

As an Old Calendarist Orthodox, I am not in communion with the New Calendarist Orthodox. Although there are still those in the New Calendarist Orthodox Church who follow the Julian (Old) calendar, they are never called Old Calendarists. Originally the term “Old Calendarist” was used as a sort of slur against us but today it’s just used for clarification.

Do you see the breach of communion between NewC and OldC Orthodox as similar to the breach with Catholics?

I’m sure you’ll find opinions and beliefs there that you don’t accept. I find many on here and on Orthodox forums that I do not accept. I was just suggesting visiting and participating in an Orthodox forum so that you can get a better understanding of how the Orthodox view various topics, as you’ll get more of an Orthodox POV there and more of a Catholic POV here.

Many POVs, sure. But in the CC there is an official position, so that that it is clear which POVs adhere to the teachings of the church, which diverge from it, and which are just nuts. In the OC the mainstream includes all POVs.

But the faith was the same in 600 AD. When I said we need to be “the same” I was referring to the faith.

Has the faith deviated from the faith in 600 AD? I say: no.

 

[dzheremi]

Large??

Well, yes, I suppose “large” is a relative term. Is it large compared to the worldwide (~1 billion) membership? No. But it is large enough to have spawned several movements in many different countries, and popular enough to have drawn the attention of the Vatican and drawn them into talks with some of its leaders.

 

[Marybeloved]

No. We’re not even having arguments. We’re stating facts. It is a fact that you cannot love the schism away. Catholics and Orthodox already love each other (most of them do, anyway), and yet they are no closer to reunion as a result.

So you’re telling me you’ve never met a loving Orthodox person? True love does not exist between the Churches? Or are you of the opinion that love is only true when it overlooks all the errors that keep Rome from holding the same faith as the Orthodox? (i.e., keeps reunion from being a reality)

I don’t think that’s love at all.

No it isn’t. The Orthodox have been surviving and being Christian without Rome for 1000-1500 years and counting. The issue is the content of the faith.

No I don’t, though if I did it would be a reasonable fear (cf. the Eastern and Oriental parts of the Roman communion). But no, I don’t fear that at all. Believe me, if anyone is going to compromise the Coptic Orthodox Church it will be the Copts themselves, not Rome. There are so few Catholics in Egypt it’s really a non-issue. Only in the diaspora (> 10% of all Copts) are there these kinds of issues, and they don’t come up as a result of some sort of attraction to or meddling from Rome, but from the youth being attracted to Protestantism because they now live in Protestant countries.

I don’t fear change. I trust that the bishops of the Orthodox church know what they’re doing. I should think if anyone fears change, it is Roman Catholics, given their large “traditionalist” sector who would like to bring things back to the times before the Vatican II reforms. Maybe you are projecting here.

What? No I don’t. Now that I am in the southwest, I am under HG Bishop David, whom I love, and I love all the other bishops, too. Bishop Musa, Bishop Suriel, HH Pope Shenouda III…all amazing examples of Christian leadership and, yes, Christian love. Why would I fear their authority? There’s no reason to fear it.

And I don’t fear Rome’s authority either, since it doesn’t have any in the Orthodox church.

Egypt has, by most accounts, produced more martyrs than any one particular church in the world. So many, in fact, that the Coptic calendar counts the years by “A.M.”, meaning “Anno Martyrum”, or “Year of the Martyrs”, with reference to the beginning of the Diocletian persecutions in Egypt. And it still produces many, many martyrs (see: El Kosheh, Imbaba, etc.), and will produce many, many more. Can we “stand” it? Well…is the holy church still there after 2,000 years or not? According to Attwater’s “Eastern Catholic Worship”, in 1945 (the date of publication) there were less than a million Copts in Egypt, including Catholics and Orthodox. Now there are 8 to 12 million Coptic Orthodox, 90% of whom in Egypt. (Wikipedia says 10 to 20, but all the actual Coptic sources I’ve read that are not from advocacy groups say 8 to 12.)

Yeah, that most definitely IS an illusion, but on your part, not anyone else’s. I definitely don’t see that on the side of the Orthodox (whether EO or OO). It is the Roman Catholics who claim to have a bishop whose leadership is over the whole world. Again, I think you are projecting.

What was all that stuff you wrote above about me being full of fear?

I’m sorry, perhaps I’m the one who doesn’t truly understand, but how is the discussion suddenly about copts?

I don’t know how any Christian can say that love cannot cure division, which the schism certainly is. If love cannot cure it, nothing will. Love is the only thing that can allow both sides to look at the issues in dispute from the lense of truth rather than from that proud chest-thumping desire to be right at all cost.

Your attitude seems to be that the orthodox don’t need other Christians. I’m tempted to say that I understand, The RC does teach that the church of christ subsists in her, but I’d be lying. No Church/ecclesial group is truly complete as long as there are lovers of Christ baptised in the name of the Blessed Trinity outside communion with each other- Christians who love our lord, baptized, in the state of Grace are, whether others protest, pull their hair or scream themselves hoarse, part of the body of Christ. Why should they continue to be visibly separate? At least we should be eagerly, prayerfully, fearfully workning towards unity as best as we can in love, while we wait a miracle that our lord will surely grant us if we take the first steps of love and in faith. I hardly think that the apostles, were they to miraculously return to us, would put up with this schism for a day longer.

 

[Marybeloved]

I agree with this in principle. However, I would caution that we be careful about what constitutes having the “exact same faith”. You and I can have the exact same “faith” (beliefs) and yet differ in how we express it (practice).
We must be careful not to allow differences in practice, which often are regional/cultural and actually enrich God’s Church, to become barriers to unity.

Peace
James

I would also add differences in expression of the same truths of the faith, as one of those things that should not,in charity, be allowed to stand in the way of unity.

 

[CompSciGuy]

I’m Catholic and I make the sign of the cross the same way as the Orthodox. While we use the Gregorian Calendar, some parishes in our Church uses the Julian. We say we’re Orthodox in communion with Rome, but many Latin Catholics say we’re not Catholic enough, and many Orthodox say we’re not Orthodox enough.

How can they say this??? If you are in Communion with Rome then you’re Catholic! Why would anyone say otherwise?

 

[dzheremi]

Why? Because of the NO. NO, NO. NO, attutude. When the list is complete we’ll talk. I say get here with an open mind and we could make this happen. To me its just that simple. Then what ever is wrong I guess after talking about it day in and day out for awhile, we’ll come to an agreement

How is this in any way a response to what you quoted? I don’t know this “NO, NO, NO” attitude you’re talking about. Certainly leaders and laypeople of the Orthodox church have talked to leaders and laypeople of your church without there being agreement beforehand on any given issue, so I don’t know what you’re talking about regarding some sort of list to complete. Any such lists that I’ve seen have been formulated are generally at the local level in response to a question from a Catholic visitor or inquirer about what sorts of things need to be resolved in order for reunion to take place. They’re individual musings only. The last one that I saw (from some yahoo on the internet, not the EP or any other Patriarch) contained many things that I personally disagreed with, and many Orthodox also commenting on it disagreed with. Never mistake such lists for “the Orthodox position”. I can guarantee there is no such list in the hands or minds of any Eastern or Oriental Patriarch who visits your Pope.

Of course I have, and they are not the issue, its the stubborn, obstinate attutude which I’m taken back by.

I see. So you dislike the internet, not the Orthodox. Great. Me too.

Listen correct

:ehh:

Love is I’ll be you friend but I won’t accept your negativity, responsible, love and concern. Thats not locking your brother out of the house and saying when you act as I say you can come in.

If I’m understanding the implications of your metaphor, you believe that the Orthodox have unfairly or hastily removed the Roman West from communion, and now are being un-brotherly about “letting them back in”? I don’t really know what to say to that, other than to remind you that it was the Papal legates who originally placed the bull of excommunication on the altar (mid-liturgy), thereby excommunicating the Eastern Church. The Western church was excommunicated in kind.

Not that this really matters, as both are shameful, but for the purposes of historical accuracy, it would be Rome who locked the East out, not the other way around.

And of course you can only come back in when you straighten up. Does your church allow people to commune within it without availing themselves of confession/reconciliation? I don’t think so. Likewise, the Roman church must reform her doctrines and stances in so far as they conflict with Orthodox Christianity. Only then, and not before, will reunion become a reality.

You and I probly talked more the last year than the church’s did in 50.

Do you mean this as a criticism of the churches, or a compliment to you and I, or what? As far as the churches are concerned, I would suggest that you just forget any Western notion of reunion coming from the top down. The Eastern and Oriental churches don’t work that way, and won’t be coerced into working that way for anybody. But for me, I think these personal interactions at the individual/local level are the way forward. The real problem, as I read recently, is not that our leaders don’t meet and talk (because they do, however infrequently), but that the faithful of both churches don’t see themselves in the other. So that’s something for laypeople to discover (or not) as a result of actual, real-life (not internet!) interaction with one another. However, as I know from talking to various Orthodox friends who either were Roman Catholic, or have Roman Catholic relatives, or have some other reason to have gone to a Roman Catholic mass at some point in their lives, what happens when an Orthodox person goes to an RC church is the opposite of what would have to happen in order for this estrangement to be lessened: They feel a heightened sense of their own orthodox faith and practice upon seeing how terribly unorthodox in both measures that the Latin church is. The sense of difference increases, not decreases. That is not something that the Orthodox can “fix” for you. And that is apparently not something that you will fix for yourselves, barring Vatican approval which will never come unless Rome comes to the realization that it has been wrong, not since Vatican II or as a result of “the spirit of Vatican II”, but for at least 1,000 years and counting.

And that’s just about the least likely thing ever, right?

And, I feel like I should point out, when Orthodox people I know have gone to an Eastern Catholic church, their impressions have been more mixed, but in some ways more problematic than when going to the RC. There is a sense that they’re like us (in externalities, to varying degrees), but at the same time they’re not. I must confess that I felt that during my time with the Byzantine Catholics (Ruthenians), without even being Orthodox myself: They’re like the Orthodox and they’re like the Roman Catholics, but they’re really not either (I don’t suspect any on CAF would necessarily have a problem with that description; they are, after all, Eastern Catholics). This is precisely why I couldn’t be one myself. I can’t deal with the cognitive dissonance involved in trying to be Orthodox outside of Orthodox-y. It’s not possible.

(continued)

 

[dzheremi]

My brother, everyone survived, so what does that say?

That God is with His faithful.

Can we survive another x-amount of years without being reduced to God onlys know what?

Why do you keep harping on this? Is there some sort of imminent threat to the survival of Christianity in Shoreline, CT. that we should all know about? I already presented one example (Egypt) of an apostolic church not only surviving incredibly harsh and ongoing oppression for ~2,000 years and counting, but actually growing significantly under it. And this is real oppression and persecution (as in martyrdom, kidnapping, riots, destruction, etc.), not just theological and ecclesiastical disagreement. Maybe the sky is falling in the West, I don’t know. From where I’m sitting, it doesn’t seem like it. But in the Orthodox church, it certainly is not.

You and I knew Egypt was gone to begin with the Islam situation. And were watching it come to its fruition. A darn shame to be right wasn’t it.

Speak for yourself, my friend. Egypt is not gone. It is very much still there. You can fly to it, though I wouldn’t recommend it at this time due to the political situation. But that’s a transitory situation, as is Islam. “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted”, remember? “There will be an altar to the Lord in the midst of Egypt”, remember? “Blessed be Egypt, my people”, remember? You have read these things, haven’t you? So you should believe in them. We should all believe in them. I know every single Copt believes in them. We are Christians, and so we believe in the holy scriptures, which tell us these truths that cannot be overturned even if the Egyptian population is down to one single Copt. God’s word is God’s word, even as the world chases after everything else. Do not trust in princes in whom there is no salvation.

I don’t fear it either. I say, lets make it happen. No, and actually I believe the CC see’s the need to stabilize as the EO has. Its a win/win situation to me.

I am not EO, but I have not heard anything about a need to “stabilize” from them, and I would guess that if such a need is recognized it has nothing to do with Rome anyway.

Right, but aren’t we talking about something different here?

Are we? Maybe you are. I don’t know. I’m talking about the authorities in the Coptic Orthodox Church, as that is the church that I find myself in. Authorities outside of that communion are not a concern of mine. So I fear neither because one is trustworthy and God-fearing, and the other(s) have no authority over me.

I’m not counting who’s losing more. Just overall numbers, and their ugly.

I think you and I must have very different views on the martyrs. Here is my view: youtube.com/watch?v=CZCmjj8MSTc

You thinking authority again, I’m talkin communion and Biblically putting the church together.

The church is already “Biblically put together”, and always has been. You don’t think it currently is because of your differing views on ecclesiology which, yes, come down to Roman Papal authority. So you can’t separate the two. Obviously the Orthodox do, as they don’t recognize Papal claims in this area.

You alright?

I’m great, thank you for asking. Better today than yesterday and better tomorrow than today.

Maybe it is me projecting and hoping for a better day.

Maybe. I also pray that the Lord guide us all to follow the narrow way that leads to salvation. On this path, every day is a better day, following in the light of Jesus Christ, our salvation and our hope.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Okay well I see no need to go further with this. We see a bit differently is all.

Peace

 

[searn77]

Do you see the breach of communion between NewC and OldC Orthodox as similar to the breach with Catholics?

I guess it has some similarities and differences. I do not wish to offend anyone here so I’ll just leave it at that.

 

[dzheremi]

Okay well I see no need to go further with this. We see a bit differently is all.

Peace

That’s fine. I’d just like to point out that this conversation could be taken as something of a microcosm of the wider Orthodox/Catholic ecumenical dialogue that is advocated often here. With no intentional malice of forethought, we find ourselves at an impasse precisely because we see things differently.

 

[Marybeloved]

That’s fine. I’d just like to point out that this conversation could be taken as something of a microcosm of the wider Orthodox/Catholic ecumenical dialogue that is advocated often here. With no intentional malice of forethought, we find ourselves at an impasse precisely because we see things differently.

Actually, isn’t the word coming out of the ongoing talks that we are actually making headway?

If the theologians are optimistic,shouldn’t we (the rest of us not actually participating in the talks) be eagerly and prayerfully supporting all efforts towards unity? I think what people have been expressing in this thread is the idea that our disposition should be to step forward in faith, hoping and counting on our lord to do the impossible rather than sit back and cross our hands across our chest saying, “unless and until”, which is the No No No attitude referred to earlier- An attitude, of course, that will ensure that we never achieve unity, I might add.

 

[JRKH]

That’s fine. I’d just like to point out that this conversation could be taken as something of a microcosm of the wider Orthodox/Catholic ecumenical dialogue that is advocated often here. With no intentional malice of forethought, we find ourselves at an impasse precisely because we see things differently.

This is true in that it really does point up the difficult and complex nature of the talks.
The key is to recognize that an “impasse” need not be permanent.
In the official talks the representatives meet discuss and then separate to allow what they have learned to digest. They pray, discuss among themselves, perhaps write to each other with new questions and clarifications. Eventually, by the Power of the Holy Spirit and the prayerful humility and desire of the participants, progress can then be made.

Think of it as the two sides coming to a brick wall that stands in their way. They can stand each on their own side and argue over who built the wall, when and how, or they can get together and start to remove the wall one brick at a time.

Peace
James

 

[GaryTaylor]

How much have the Copts been involved in the dialogue? I haven’t read this, I have read about Constantinope/Bartholomew and Russia/Kirill and Benedict. Which is all available through Pope Benedict XVI.

Obviously I think its a shame. When we talk Flight of the Holy Family, Alexandria, etc, its a very important part of Christian History.

Here’s a decent fair link for anyone who would like to read up on the Copts.

google.com/url?q=http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/copticchristians.htm&sa=U&ei=mBxRTubwIuLh0QH2wOzcBg&ved=0CB4QFjAF&usg=AFQjCNHtDvzkG-s1jgMHoegdwBJBq_5IeQ

Peace

 

[dzheremi]

Actually, isn’t the word coming out of the ongoing talks that we are actually making headway?

In some ways, sure. EO on this very board and elsewhere have pointed out how the modern RC understanding of various topics (e.g., according to EO like Fr. Andrew Damick, the understanding of the potential salvation of non-Christians/non-Catholics as put forth in “Lumen Gentium”) is closer to their own understanding than was the Catholic position in previous eras. The real question is what kind of headway could be said to have been made on the substantial issues that keep the two communions divided. On that you’ll find a variety of opinions, but since the EO view is generally that nothing can be compromised in the reunion (since, after all, from the EO perspective they have no errors in their faith to be repudiated), substantial progress involves convincing the RCC of its own errors, which is understandably very difficult, some would say hopeless.

If the theologians are optimistic,shouldn’t we (the rest of us not actually participating in the talks) be eagerly and prayerfully supporting all efforts towards unity?

Well, I certainly think it is better to be hopeful than to be pessimistic, but that hope must be tempered by a realistic assessment of just how far there is to go. Prayer, in humility, is certainly the only way forward.

I think what people have been expressing in this thread is the idea that our disposition should be to step forward in faith, hoping and counting on our lord to do the impossible rather than sit back and cross our hands across our chest saying, “unless and until”, which is the No No No attitude referred to earlier- An attitude, of course, that will ensure that we never achieve unity, I might add.

I disagree with this general idea. I think that attitude can go a long way toward making talks between individual believers either pleasant or unpleasant, but is overblown in relation to talks between leaders. For instance, the EO monks of Mt. Athos or various Catholic traditionalist figures may find the prospect of reunion with the other church as it is today an extremely distasteful idea, and their opinion may even hold some sway over the laypeople. However, the talks still go on in most cases. The EP has said that we are “ontologically different” by this point, and he still met with Pope Benedict and even prayed in the Sistine Chapel in 2008.

This was of course without compromising the stances that EO take that differentiate them from Rome, so the sense of “unless and until” can still be said to have been in effect (though obviously not every meeting is about hashing out theology to begin with).

 

[JRKH]

In some ways, sure. EO on this very board and elsewhere have pointed out how the modern RC understanding of various topics (e.g., according to EO like Fr. Andrew Damick, the understanding of the potential salvation of non-Christians/non-Catholics as put forth in “Lumen Gentium”) is closer to their own understanding than was the Catholic position in previous eras. The real question is what kind of headway could be said to have been made on the substantial issues that keep the two communions divided. On that you’ll find a variety of opinions, but since the EO view is generally that nothing can be compromised in the reunion (since, after all, from the EO perspective they have no errors in their faith to be repudiated), substantial progress involves convincing the RCC of its own errors, which is understandably very difficult, some would say hopeless.

Snip)

In relation to the bolded…section.

This is where I see a problem and it really is a matter of coming at the issues with a “debating” attitude instead of a conciliatory attitude. It smacks of I’m right, your wrong".
Far better to say that, while nothing can be compromised, much can be more deeply understood. The more substantial the issue, the more we need to take this approach in humility and prayer working through language, interpretation, culture, history and other factors to get to the essential truths of the issues.

I remain hopeful - but neither do I expect a 1000 years worth of problems to go away in a single generation…

Peace
James

 

[dzheremi]

How much have the Copts been involved in the dialogue? I haven’t read this, I have read about Constantinope/Bartholomew and Russia/Kirill and Benedict. Which is all available through Pope Benedict XVI.

You can read a little bit about Coptic involvement in ecumenical dialogue with various churches on H.E. Metropolitan Bishoy’s official website. From an outsider’s perspective, the Copts and the OO in general have something of a different attitude toward ecumenism than do the EO. They are no less steadfast in their own faith than the EO, but as a practical matter of having been in the minority following the split at Chalcedon, they are perhaps a bit more pragmatic. H.H. Pope Shenouda III has said (paraphrased) “We do not fight against people; we fight against ideas”. This was not in reference to ecumenism, but I think it applies just as well there. This is not so much contrasted with an EO view (as I believe that most EO would agree with that general idea), but can be seen as somewhat different than the more historically-minded objections of the EO, which makes sense when you think of how much more shared history exists between the RC and the EO than the RC and the OO. There is quite literally more to be dealt with that the Copts and the other OO would not have to deal with since they were already out of the picture by the time of (for instance) Photios, or the Crusades, or the events of 1054.