Confusing signs

[mardukm]

Here are two articles regarding Catholic-Orthodox relations which give different signals:

theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/news/2010/05/primacy-synodicality-and-unity-of-the-church/

zenit.org/article-29172?l=english

I am posting this here on ECF because I want to primarily get commentary from my EC brethren on the matter. Of course, my EO brethren are more than welcome to add their viewpoints as well.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[marlo]

i read this article and its disappointing to know that their conclusion is based on wrong understanding of catholic theology,

"Therefore no other head whatsoever is accepted in this Eastern Church, save only our Lord Jesus Christ, from the Father given to the whole Church and its foundation.”

Catholics would say that Christ is the head of the church but it doesn’t mean that the Patriarch does not have authority on his bishops, though Patriarch and Bishops are still equal bishops. Pentarchy is an invention, there was no Pentarchy in the first century

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food?

theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/news/2010/05/primacy-synodicality-and-unity-of-the-church/

Here are two articles regarding Catholic-Orthodox relations which give different signals:

theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/news/2010/05/primacy-synodicality-and-unity-of-the-church/

zenit.org/article-29172?l=english

I am posting this here on ECF because I want to primarily get commentary from my EC brethren on the matter. Of course, my EO brethren are more than welcome to add their viewpoints as well.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[josephdaniel29]

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food?

You can have all the “new” food my friend, we’ll get by just fine with the old.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[Vico]

Here are two articles regarding Catholic-Orthodox relations which give different signals:

theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/news/2010/05/primacy-synodicality-and-unity-of-the-church/

zenit.org/article-29172?l=english

I am posting this here on ECF because I want to primarily get commentary from my EC brethren on the matter. Of course, my EO brethren are more than welcome to add their viewpoints as well.

Blessings,
Marduk

Yes it is confusing, become some are for and some against.

We know that the ecumenical Balamand document (Lebanon, 1993) was not received by all Orthodox and that the meeting had no representatives from six autocephalous Churches (Jerusalem, Serbia, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, and Czechoslovakia).

Echoing Mark of Ephesus (1392-1444), once again His Eminence Seraphim, Metropolitan of Piraeus speaks, just as he also spoke in 2007, against ecumenism, stating the Papacy is heresy. His Eminence Seraphim’s opinion in 2007 was in direct opposition to His Beatitude the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece Christodoulos. I wonder what is the opinion of His Beatitude Ieronymos II who succeded him? His Beatitude Ieronymos II certainly did address the Church of England, May 2009, saying that ecumenical cooperation was necessary.

 

[skinny_pumpkin]

i read this article and its disappointing to know that their conclusion is based on wrong understanding of catholic theology,

"Therefore no other head whatsoever is accepted in this Eastern Church, save only our Lord Jesus Christ, from the Father given to the whole Church and its foundation.”

Catholics would say that Christ is the head of the church but it doesn’t mean that the Patriarch does not have authority on his bishops, though Patriarch and Bishops are still equal bishops. Pentarchy is an invention, there was no Pentarchy in the first century

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food?

It is not a misunderstanding of Catholic theology, it is an assertion of Orthodox theology. To paint it with a broad brush, Rome wants the East to come under 1 see. The orthodox want to recognize the Roman see as they attribute authority to their "Rome"s. The Orthodox view of primacy might be better understood from the stand point that Russia was described as the “third Rome” by many of its theologians when the Czar was in power.

As far as feeding the sheep. The paradigm for the Orthodox is not defining new dogmas, but defending or maintaining what has always been true and guiding the “flock” accordingly.

 

[wynd]

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food?

Which “new” dogmas would you like to see defined?

 

[Stephentlig]

At the moment I feel its important for Both Orthodox and Catholics to remain united in Love, and understand that arguments will never change a mind already made up.

God will be the one who will unite us, so its best off leaving such discussions to the hierarchy of the Orthodox and Catholic Church. Let us remain united in Love and allow God to do the rest.

At the present moment the current response to this difficult situation should be one of plenty of prayer for unity. Pray for both to unite the way God wants us to unite and not the way we want it.

‘‘May they be one’’

Pax Christi
Thoxa Sto Christo

Stephen <3

 

[gmcbroom]

Skinny pumpkin You indeed painted with a broad brush. More like you touched up a picasso with a power sprayer set to wide. I doubt the Roman See wantes all Sees under it? After all if that was the case they would have abolished all the others by now. It’s way more complicated than that. First the Catholic Church and the Orthodox should actually speak the same language. Their last attempt where Rome sent a man versed in Latin and the Orthodox sent a man versed in Greek to meet and discuss unity would have been extremely hilarious if the stakes weren’t so high. In the end each side excommunicated the other in frustration turning what was supposed to be beneficial event into a tragedy. Stephentlitgs idea of prayer is no doubt the best idea on the laymans end. So we shoiuld all get to it.

 

[Volodymyr]

Pentarchy is an invention, there was no Pentarchy in the first century

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food? ]

**The Latin Church is an invention - there was no Latin Church in the first century. The Vatican bureaucracy is an invention - there was no Vatican- no imperial papacy in the first century.

Look at the Catholics now - they want to define a single new dogma as frequently as they can be conjured - especially since 1871 they can do this freely and know that the new dogma will be infallible - because they have infallibly defined that they are infallible (who could argue with such logic). These new novel dogmas must absolutely be the “food” that Christ spoke concerning. Yes food is - new and novel dogmas - not the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Eucharist.**

 

[malphono]

Cutting to the chase, we get back to the “primacy” issue (mardukm’s specialty . )

In general, the EO subscribe to the “Low Petrine” view (the famous primus inter pares), but if I read the article correctly, this Metropolitan Seraphim takes a position that is even beyond that (perhaps we should call it the “No Petrine” view). That position is as untenable as the “Absolute Petrine” view. They are the two extremes, (rather like Nazism and Bolshevism). and while the effects are the same (negative), the extremes are diametrically opposed and can never be reconciled.

Very strong arguments can be made (as brother mardukm has done elsewhere), that even the Vatican Councils (I & II) can be read to acknowledge the “High Petrine” view (or at least a variation of it). OTOH, this Metropolitan Seraphim (in the “No Petrine” view) totally ignores the first millennium, where the “High Petrine” view was a fact of ecclesiatical life.

As an aside, the other article implies that Metropolitan Filaret of Minsk and Sluck is favorable to reunion. That may or may not be, but I take anything from MP (which, like it or not, controls Minsk in fact if not in theory, just as it always has) with a grain of salt (more like a salt-lick).

My :twocents: for what little it’s worth.

 

[malphono]

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food?

It’s more like “feed my sheep” using time-tested recipes passed down from grandmother to granddaughter rather than “nouvelle cuisine” (aka “elf food)” or “fusion” food (eecch!) or other such new-age things.

Seems to me it’s not really necessary to define “new dogma” periodically. In any case, what “new dogma” has been defined in the West? (Let’s not bring up the IC and the Assumption. Neither taught anything “new” at all.) I think that what’s left is “Papal Infallibility” (which has been used only to define the IC and Assumption anyway), and even that isn’t necessarily what it might appear to be at first glance. Brother mardukm is better equipped than I to explain further if necessary.

 

[Pakesh]

Pentarchy is an invention, there was no Pentarchy in the first century

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food? ]

**The Latin Church is an invention - there was no Latin Church in the first century. The Vatican bureaucracy is an invention - there was no Vatican- no imperial papacy in the first century.

Look at the Catholics now - they want to define a single new dogma as frequently as they can be conjured - especially since 1871 they can do this freely and know that the new dogma will be infallible - because they have infallibly defined that they are infallible (who could argue with such logic). These new novel dogmas must absolutely be the “food” that Christ spoke concerning. Yes food is - new and novel dogmas - not the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Eucharist.**

I could just as easily assert there was no Orthodox Church in the first century. I hope you are being rhetorical, b/c what you said is just ridiculous. I can’t get past that the Orthodox were okay with the Imperial Emperors meddling with the faith, and then point a finger at the spectre of Papal Supremecy.

 

[Vico]

…Very strong arguments can be made (as brother mardukm has done elsewhere), that even the Vatican Councils (I & II) can be read to acknowledge the “High Petrine” view (or at least a variation of it). OTOH, this Metropolitan Seraphim (in the “No Petrine” view) totally ignores the first millennium, where the “High Petrine” view was a fact of ecclesiatical life…

I agree.

The high petrine view is suppored by Lumen Gentium 21 and 27. A bishop’s authority to shepheard a particular church (diocese) is by episcopal ordination, exercising their own power, not delegated power, (see LG 27), but only when in hierarchical communion with the head and members of the college of bishops (see LG 21). Papal power and of the college of bishops is coordinating and may limit a bishop’s episcopal power for the benefit of the whole Church.

 

[DavidKays]

Vico and to the rest, may I reply to this discussion that may or may not bring some light. May I put simply and this may anger or upset the Orthodox that statements from leaders of the Orthodox Communion do not effect God’s judgement at all. These men can say what they want but in reality they do themselves a disservice to God and to the Church when they make statements regarding the Church of Rome. Honestly are we ever going to wake up and cure this fiasco. I believe that God will have to wait until these men have died so that the next generation will finally bury this feud! I honestly believe we are sinning gravely when we act against God’s wishes to unite the Church. Any statements concerning the Roman Catholic Church from us always seem to be negative. The Roman Catholic Church has the right to be who She is because of Her Apostolic founder St.Peter. When are we ( I am referring to the Orthodox ) going to wake up and finally admit the truth that our Catholic brothers and sisters are the successors of St.Peter’s missionary work and to include them in our own lives! St.Peter is an important Apostle that Our Lord called into His College. He has the right given to him by the Lord and from the Church to exercise that right into the government and service of God’s people so that his successors who are the Popes can continue that service today. Thank God that He called into existence the founding 12 Apostles so that today we still have the successors of those Apostles with the Pope in Rome and the rest in the Eastern Church. Whatever happened in the past all I can say is to bury it! If we are Christians we need to exercise forgiveness to the past whether we were the ones hurt or whether the one who has hurt us. So the Catholics hurt us some 1000 years ago. What are you going to do, remind them everyday. You might as well do that till the Second Coming with the way you are doing it today. We need to forget the past and accept apologies and forgive. How are we ever going to face God by the way we are acting! You can’t go to heaven unless you repent of your sins now in our own prilgrimage so how come we do not do that to our own brothers and sisters. How can you face God when we are criticizing those whom He loves. He is not going to listen to us. He will turn His Face around because we are doing it to people He loves. Why will He listen to us ( I mean the Orthodox ). Christianity is built on Love, Forgiveness, Mercy and Humility. These are the tools we need to exemplified for they are the true signs of a witnessing Church. If we are true to the Gospel then the Church will be united. What I see in the Church is not truth but excuse me something which the world only accepts and that is pride. We need to exercise humility and allow the Lord to unite the Church so that united we can go ahead to witness together in a troubled and messed up world. God Bless!

 

[Volodymyr]

When are we ( I am referring to the Orthodox ) going to wake up and finally admit the truth that our Catholic brothers and sisters are the successors of St.Peter’s missionary work and to include them in our own lives! St.Peter is an important Apostle that Our Lord called into His College. He has the right given to him by the Lord and from the Church to exercise that right into the government and service of God’s people so that his successors who are the Popes can continue that service today. Thank God that He called into existence the founding 12 Apostles so that today we still have the successors of those Apostles with the Pope in Rome and the rest in the Eastern Church. Whatever happened in the past all I can say is to bury it! If we are Christians we need to exercise forgiveness to the past whether we were the ones hurt or whether the one who has hurt us. So the Catholics hurt us some 1000 years ago. We need to forget the past and accept apologies and forgive. . How can you face God when we are criticizing those whom He loves. He is not going to listen to us. He will turn His Face around because we are doing it to people He loves. Why will He listen to us ( I mean the Orthodox ). Christianity is built on Love, Forgiveness, Mercy and Humility. What I see in the Church is not truth but pride. We need to exercise humility and allow the Lord to unite the Church so that united we can go ahead to witness together in a troubled and messed up world. God Bless!

I agree that Unity of God’s Holy Churches is important for all Christians to strive toward.

Catolic priests from Litva and Poland were in Soviet times t great assistance to my faith… I found that at such time of persecution and ateism, believers (Christians, Jews, Mohammedans, Buddhists) all found that we had so much in common. Then a believer meant something and belief in God united all.

Such discussins as being here will promote unity, I hope. Criticism is not a sin if it is sincere and truthful. Catolics criticize us for our faults which we often do not seen, we criticize Catolics for faults that they do not see. Of course some do not wish to see the fault or the problem or to step a little aside to see the point of view of “other side” as one could say. But, David, you are very right, God is going to judge us for what we do to our brothers and sisters in Christ, we must be merciful and humble but also truthful.

 

[Stephentlig]

Vico and to the rest, may I reply to this discussion that may or may not bring some light. May I put simply and this may anger or upset the Orthodox that statements from leaders of the Orthodox Communion do not effect God’s judgement at all. These men can say what they want but in reality they do themselves a disservice to God and to the Church when they make statements regarding the Church of Rome. Honestly are we ever going to wake up and cure this fiasco. I believe that God will have to wait until these men have died so that the next generation will finally bury this feud! I honestly believe we are sinning gravely when we act against God’s wishes to unite the Church. Any statements concerning the Roman Catholic Church from us always seem to be negative. The Roman Catholic Church has the right to be who She is because of Her Apostolic founder St.Peter. When are we ( I am referring to the Orthodox ) going to wake up and finally admit the truth that our Catholic brothers and sisters are the successors of St.Peter’s missionary work and to include them in our own lives! St.Peter is an important Apostle that Our Lord called into His College. He has the right given to him by the Lord and from the Church to exercise that right into the government and service of God’s people so that his successors who are the Popes can continue that service today. Thank God that He called into existence the founding 12 Apostles so that today we still have the successors of those Apostles with the Pope in Rome and the rest in the Eastern Church. Whatever happened in the past all I can say is to bury it! If we are Christians we need to exercise forgiveness to the past whether we were the ones hurt or whether the one who has hurt us. So the Catholics hurt us some 1000 years ago. What are you going to do, remind them everyday. You might as well do that till the Second Coming with the way you are doing it today. We need to forget the past and accept apologies and forgive. How are we ever going to face God by the way we are acting! You can’t go to heaven unless you repent of your sins now in our own prilgrimage so how come we do not do that to our own brothers and sisters. How can you face God when we are criticizing those whom He loves. He is not going to listen to us. He will turn His Face around because we are doing it to people He loves. Why will He listen to us ( I mean the Orthodox ). Christianity is built on Love, Forgiveness, Mercy and Humility. These are the tools we need to exemplified for they are the true signs of a witnessing Church. If we are true to the Gospel then the Church will be united. What I see in the Church is not truth but excuse me something which the world only accepts and that is pride. We need to exercise humility and allow the Lord to unite the Church so that united we can go ahead to witness together in a troubled and messed up world. God Bless!

I commend you for such a great post. I praise God for such Holy men as i’ve witnessed this evening. We must Unite in Love before unity of the full faith will be accomplished. :clapping::byzsoc::harp:

Prayer is the best response to any difficult situation, arguments may be a seed with a potential to sprout but its God who makes things grow and God who will make us unite, for his ways are not our ways.

May we all learn to live a True Life in God, no more fighting, but with humility may we work things out.

Pax Christi
Thoxa sto Theo, sto Christo, Sto Pnevma t’agio

Stephentlig

 

[jimmy]

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food?

theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/news/2010/05/primacy-synodicality-and-unity-of-the-church/

That is a completely ridiculous statement. That is what drives people away from the west. You are obsessed with dogma, as if dogma is something good in itself. It is rationalism. You would define whatever sounds good, as long as it fits with your logic. New dogma isn’t what is needed to nourish the Church.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Marlo,

and look at the Orthodox now, they dont want to define even one new single dogma, after 1000 years, where is the “feed my sheep” instruction given by the Lord? feed my sheep with old food?

I’ll have to agree with brother Jimmy. The desire to make dogma is not a reflection that the Orthodox are not feeding their sheep.

And I don’t know how you can rather blithely call the eternal Truths of Sacred Tradition, “old food.”

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Jimmy,

New dogma isn’t what is needed to nourish the Church.

I agree with everything else you stated except this. In fact, dogma is more often than not a response to theological aberrations in the Church. We may need more in the future - you never know. So while dogma is not always needed, it does indeed provide spiritual nourishment for the Church.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[jimmy]

Dear brother Jimmy,

I agree with everything else you stated except this. In fact, dogma is more often than not a response to theological aberrations in the Church. We may need more in the future - you never know. So while dogma is not always needed, it does indeed provide spiritual nourishment for the Church.

Blessings,
Marduk

I agree with you, I am not trying to say that dogma is always bad. Sometimes it is necessary to define dogmas. It was necessary for the Council of Nicaea to declare that Christ ‘begotten not made’ and ‘homoousios’ with the Father. It was necessary for Ephesus to affirm the title Theotokos and for Chalcedon to affirm the union of two natures in one hypostasis. It was also necessary for the west to affirm the real presence of Christ in the dogmas of Trent. But dogma isn’t the end, and the definition of new dogmas isn’t always necessary. The east hasn’t had any need to define new dogmas therefore it was better that none were defined. We don’t need to define new dogmas, we need to protect the faith we have and that is the purpose of dogmas. It seems that the attitude espoused by marlo says the exact opposite; it asserts an actual development brought along with the new dogmas. Dogma actually makes the Church grow according to his understanding. In reality dogma isn’t what nourishes the Church but only a protection against heresy. The faith as it has always been taught is enough to nourish the Church. The faith of Peter was enough for us today.

I started a new thread on this subject because I figured it was off topic for this thread.