Catholic/Orthodox unity

  • Thread starter Thread starter ziapueblo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

ziapueblo

Guest
Greetings,

I know that the Catholic Church will never abandon the Dogma of Papal Infallibility. However, when it comes to this particular Dogma, is there a possibility of bending it some, not breaking and snapping it, just bending it a little?

I remember listening to Catholic Answers a couple of weeks ago with guest Kenneth Whitehead. I believe he addressed this question but I missed his answer.

Thanks and God bless,
ZP
 
The closest thing to “bending” that I have hard is a suggestion made by some Eastern Catholics, namely that the declarations of the bishop of Rome be infallible declarations for the Latin Church but not for the other Churches.
 
ziapueblo said:
Greetings,

I know that the Catholic Church will never abandon the Dogma of Papal Infallibility. However, when it comes to this particular Dogma, is there a possibility of bending it some, not breaking and snapping it, just bending it a little?

I remember listening to Catholic Answers a couple of weeks ago with guest Kenneth Whitehead. I believe he addressed this question but I missed his answer.

Thanks and God bless,
ZP
Click to expand...
I believe that there is every chance that the issue of infallibility will be addressed and clarified to everyones satisfaction by those charged with working toward unity between East and West.
If we can see anything in the Church it is that beliefs, even dogmatic items can be expressed more fully. The issue of infallibility is one that is so misunderstood by so many that I think there is much room for additional understanding.

Peace
James
 
I don’t know if it’s merely the matter of Papal Infallibility, or the more general matter of Papal Primacy. I thought I heard that Pope Benedict XVI has considered the idea that the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches might only be held to the notions of Papal Primacy that existed at the times of their schisms. Is that true? If so, how might that affect Papal Infallibility?

One good book on many of the issues separating the Catholic and Orthodox Churches is Cleenewerck’s “His Broken Body.” As you’ll read, Papal Primacy isn’t the only issue.
 
Bensalem said:
I don’t know if it’s merely the matter of Papal Infallibility, or the more general matter of Papal Primacy. I thought I heard that Pope Benedict XVI has considered the idea that the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches might only be held to the notions of Papal Primacy that existed at the times of their schisms. Is that true? If so, how might that affect Papal Infallibility?

One good book on many of the issues separating the Catholic and Orthodox Churches is Cleenewerck’s “His Broken Body.” As you’ll read, Papal Primacy isn’t the only issue.
Click to expand...
Certainly after a thousand years there are bound to be many issues both large and small. The best thing that the faithful can do is to accept each others as brothers and pray for wisdom for those charged with working through the issues.

Peace
James
 
Ultimately, I do not think that Catholic/Orthodox unity is something that we can think out. There are many problems and seemingly insurmountable barriers. However, just as God “thought” of the Incarnation, so too perhaps might God have the perfect solution for creating true unity.
 
Madaglan said:
Ultimately, I do not think that Catholic/Orthodox unity is something that we can think out. There are many problems and seemingly insurmountable barriers. However, just as God “thought” of the Incarnation, so too perhaps might God have the perfect solution for creating true unity.
Click to expand...
Indeed- With God all things are possible.

Perhaps there are many differences that we humans cannot resolve, but with prayer and humility God can change our hearts, our minds, and our understanding to make the “insurmountable”, easily resolved.

Peace
James
 
Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium.
[Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (San Francisco*, CA: Ignatius Press]******

Certainly, no one who claims allegiance to Catholic theology can simply declare the doctrine of primacy null and void, especially not if he seeks to understand the objections and evaluates with an open mind the relative weight of what can be determined historically. Nor is it possible, on the other hand, for him to regard as the only possible form and, consequently, as binding on all Christians the form this primacy has taken in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The symbolic gestures of Pope Paul VI and, in particular, his kneeling before the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch were an attempt to express precisely this and, by such signs, to point the way out of the historical impasse.
*[Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1987), p. 198]
 
Mickey said:
Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium.
*[Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (
Click to expand...
San Francisco**, CA: Ignatius Press]******

Certainly, no one who claims allegiance to Catholic theology can simply declare the doctrine of primacy null and void, especially not if he seeks to understand the objections and evaluates with an open mind the relative weight of what can be determined historically. Nor is it possible, on the other hand, for him to regard as the only possible form and, consequently, as binding on all Christians the form this primacy has taken in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The symbolic gestures of Pope Paul VI and, in particular, his kneeling before the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch were an attempt to express precisely this and, by such signs, to point the way out of the historical impasse.
*[Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1987), p. 198]

Good examples of Rome reaching out in friendship.

Peace
James
 
Mickey said:
Sound more like an admission to me. 😉
Click to expand...
Isn’t it funny how the same text can be read differently by different people.

🤷

I prefer to just look at what is says than try to make some sort of judgement on it. This is why I always take the position in these kinds of threads that it is best if we just pray really hard for those who are charged by The Church (Both East and West) to work things out.
Regardless of how you or I personally view it, there can be no doubt but that the Latin Church sees room for compromise, for discussion and for a fuller understanding between east and west.
It recognizes that reunification cannot be one side capitulating to the other, but rather seeking greater and deeper understanding.

Peace
James
 
I just dont see how these issue are such a big deal to EO. is it better for them to be under a government than be friends with the holy father? how is the infalibillity dogma going to harm anyone in the Faith is beyond me. what can the holy father do that is so bad? does it really matter? he is a holly man and i just dont understand how anyone can reject him. just think of the years of suffering of the EO for being under the governments of the world and yet rejects the loving friendship of the holy father. this is just beyond my understanding. but yet, humans are very difficult. sometimes we can create confusion where really there is no confusion. just imagined if we didnt have the pope to call for union, where would Christianity be today? just think of the danger we are in today’s world. the world are united against God and we advocates for Christ are fighting over something that really is no big deal. just think wihtout the holy father, there would be no authority to call for union. since today’s christianity is every man for himself. just think about that for a minute. let’s be realistic. we should at this moment to be greatfull to our Lord for giving us an authority here on earth.

hopefull for a fast reunion of the Church.
 
ziapueblo said:
Greetings,

I know that the Catholic Church will never abandon the Dogma of Papal Infallibility. However, when it comes to this particular Dogma, is there a possibility of bending it some, not breaking and snapping it, just bending it a little? I remember listening to Catholic Answers a couple of weeks ago with guest Kenneth Whitehead. I believe he addressed this question but I missed his answer. Thanks and God bless, ZP
Click to expand...
JL: There is also the possibility the Office and authority of Peter could be shared by a group of men, with the majority vote binding on the whole church sorta like a mini council.
 
The below quote could only have been written by someone who is completely ignorant of history.

Wisdom Seeker, in the future, please study up before you make such outrageous comments/questions which are only valuable if you are trying to infuriate.
wisdomseeker said:
I just dont see how these issue are such a big deal to EO. is it better for them to be under a government than be friends with the holy father? how is the infalibillity dogma going to harm anyone in the Faith is beyond me. what can the holy father do that is so bad? does it really matter? he is a holly man and i just dont understand how anyone can reject him. just think of the years of suffering of the EO for being under the governments of the world and yet rejects the loving friendship of the holy father. this is just beyond my understanding. but yet, humans are very difficult. sometimes we can create confusion where really there is no confusion. just imagined if we didnt have the pope to call for union, where would Christianity be today? just think of the danger we are in today’s world. the world are united against God and we advocates for Christ are fighting over something that really is no big deal. just think wihtout the holy father, there would be no authority to call for union. since today’s christianity is every man for himself. just think about that for a minute. let’s be realistic. we should at this moment to be greatfull to our Lord for giving us an authority here on earth.

hopefull for a fast reunion of the Church.
Click to expand...
 
JRKH said:
Isn’t it funny how the same text can be read differently by different people.

🤷

I prefer to just look at what is says than try to make some sort of judgement on it. This is why I always take the position in these kinds of threads that it is best if we just pray really hard for those who are charged by The Church (Both East and West) to work things out.
Regardless of how you or I personally view it, there can be no doubt but that the Latin Church sees room for compromise, for discussion and for a fuller understanding between east and west.
It recognizes that reunification cannot be one side capitulating to the other, but rather seeking greater and deeper understanding.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
I’m rather offended by the idea of reunion with people who are willing to “compromise” on what they hold to be doctrine, to tell you the truth.
 
jlhargus said:
JL: There is also the possibility the Office and authority of Peter could be shared by a group of men, with the majority vote binding on the whole church sorta like a mini council.
Click to expand...
Our understanding is that all Bishops are successors of St. Peter, and while Rome holds a Petrine office (note a, not the), that does not give it any sort of special powers.

Historically Rome did have certain perogatives granted to it, but that had nothing to do with St. Peter, just as the perogatives granted to Constantinople and Jerusalem had nothing to do with St. Andrew or St. James.
 
Nine_Two said:
I’m rather offended by the idea of reunion with people who are willing to “compromise” on what they hold to be doctrine, to tell you the truth.
Click to expand...
He never said that the Catholic Church would compromise truth for the sake of unity.
 
Mickey said:
Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium.
*[Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (
Click to expand...
San Francisco**, CA: Ignatius Press]******

Certainly, no one who claims allegiance to Catholic theology can simply declare the doctrine of primacy null and void, especially not if he seeks to understand the objections and evaluates with an open mind the relative weight of what can be determined historically. Nor is it possible, on the other hand, for him to regard as the only possible form and, consequently, as binding on all Christians the form this primacy has taken in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The symbolic gestures of Pope Paul VI and, in particular, his kneeling before the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch were an attempt to express precisely this and, by such signs, to point the way out of the historical impasse.
*[Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1987), p. 198]

You need to read “Called to Communion” by Pope Benedict XVI (albeit he was Cardinal Ratzinger at the time) it will help you to understand his perspective on the ecclesiology of the Church a lot more.
 
Nine_Two said:
I’m rather offended by the idea of reunion with people who are willing to “compromise” on what they hold to be doctrine, to tell you the truth.
Click to expand...
Actually my full comment went further than what you seem to have seen. What I said was:
there can be no doubt but that the Latin Church sees room for compromise, for discussion and for a fuller understanding between east and west.

Perhaps the term “compromise” was not the best one to use, but the other two terms “discussion” and “fuller understanding”, should have provided you with a clearer idea of the thrust of my point.

In any event the various comments thus far on this thread certainly point up how carefull those officially involved in talks must be. It convinces me even more that these men truly need our prayers.

Peace
James
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top