Convince me

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1Tim215Mommy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, dear 1Tim215Mommy…are you “convinced” yet? If not, why not? If so, wonderful!

Oh yeah, just why was it, again, that we needed to convince you?
 
Dear 1Tim215Mommy,

In the United States, the Melkite Eparchy is based in Newton MA (outside of Boston). Our Eparchy bishop is Bishop Nicholas Samra. Our Patriarch is in Lebanon - he is shepard to all Melkites worldwide (Canada, Europe - UK, France, Italy, Belgium, United States, Mexico, South American countries, etc.)

Again, our Melkite Eparchy in the United States welcomes baptized Catholics in our Divine Worship, Communion and other prayer services. We also welcome Orthodox Christians to share in our Divine Worship and Communion. The Melkite Greek Catholic Church follows the Byzantine Rite and is a part of the Greek variant. (The Ukrainian and Ruthenian Byzantine Rites are of the Slavic variant).

Online directory is www.melkite.org see “Parish Locator” by state. There are 9 Melkite parish communities in the state of California. You can telephone the Newton chancery office to get contact/location details by calling 617-323-9922.

A good reading resource to understand the Eastern Catholic Churches whose autonomy and tradition are preserved - www.cin.org/rite.html

Your Orthodox baptism and chrismation will be respected. I am not inclined to “convince” anybody.
 
mardukm said:
Dear sister Marywarfield,

I have not seen any rudeness from brother Dzheremi this whole thread. Accusing him of rudeness is rather the rude thing, imo, and especially your overgeneralization of Holy Orthodoxy.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but I did. And let me explain why as charitably
toward the Orthodox as I can in a way that generally
RC don’t speak.

When I go to the Eucharist/the Mass/ Exposition
or just make a private visit to the Sacrament, in my
mind as an RC, I’m visiting the Lord Jesus Christ-
in His Person.
And we converse. We talk. Because He is my faithful
and only friend, He does not judge me, and is always
without fail no matter what there for me.
I like to have my morning coffee with Him.
He is my brother, father, son, and my God.

Now I understand the Orthodox considers Him, my God
in that Tabernacle and Eucharist to be not “valid”. Which
is very hurtful and offensive/rude in itself.
Ok that’s your right.
But what many of you fail to understand including yourself
and Dzheremi, is this is MY God, the heart of my
heart, my Creator and my soul.
And when Dzheremi starts critiquing the Sacrament/Eucharist
in the RC, how it is perceived (mechanistic I believe
was the word he used), received, thought of etc. not
only is it extremely disrespectful of my Lord and God,
but extremely hurtful as you are attacking that which
is the most sacred to us. Which makes Dzheremi and
yourself and other Orthodox to my mind simply rude people.
Because rude is the most charitable word I could
find for the injury sent my way.

I challenge any Orthodox or Lutheran for that matter
on any thread anywhere on the CAF where I attacked,
criticized your Real Presence or your view of, reception of, your
Real Presence. You won’t find one because I would
never do that to you. And more to the point I would never do that to Him.
As a result I would dare to guess I have
a less mechanistic approach then you or Dzheremi as I
am already more sensitive to your view of your Heart than you are of mine.

If the Orthodox want to attack RCs so be it. I would
prefer though you aim for His Arms and Legs rather
then His Heart.

You may not believe that the Lord Our God resides
in that Eucharist, but you know what? Respecting
that we do is just, hey, simple common courtesy I could
reasonably expect from any Tom, Dick and Harry so why
shouldn’t I have a higher expectation of you who claim to have the
ONLY valid Eucharist?
 
marywarfield,

I understand how this can be a touchy subject. Fwiw, I always try to be respectful of those Christians whose orders/sacraments I doubt (particularly Anglicans and Lutherans, since I believe they have the best sacramental claim out of all protestants).

Btw, mardukm is Catholic. (I don’t know whether there has been a thread relating to the fact that his profile says Orthodox – I can’t remember any off the top of my head – but you could always ask him. :))
 
Expatreprocedit said:
Fr. Casper and you see unity as oragnization/juridical unity. That is important, butthat is not the essence of unity,in the context of the Church. The essence of unity is unity of faith; the sharing of the Apostolic Faith.
Click to expand...
Consider the following (my comments)
  • John 17:20-23
  • [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me; (iow Jesus prayer encompasses the Church at all levels, the hierarchy, and the rank and file Catholic in the whole world past present and future)
  • [21] That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. (is there any room in Our Lord’s will for dissent of any kind, at any level within the Church He builds? No. That includes being united with Peter. Ya know, that’s also Our Lord’s plan…agreed? #616 ]
  • [22] And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them; that they may be one, as we also are one: [23] I in them, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me. ( What Out Lord said He will build, is to be perfectly one in everything just as the Trinity is perfectly united. )
The Orthodox are
  • not united with Peter.
  • not united with each other (as Card Kasper noted).
  • not united with the (Eastern Catholics) united with Peter
Bp John makes some excellent points https://melkite.org/eparchy/bishop-j…ited-with-rome
E:
  1. I think you are referring to a statement by Cardinal Ratzinger before he became Pope Benedict.
Click to expand...
True

At the time the proposal was made, he was head of the doctrine of the faith. The pope in effect approves what he writes before he writes it.
E:
I thought it was a very hopeful statement at the time. However, I am not aware it was ever made a formal proposal to the Orthodox Church.
Click to expand...
You’re correct, it was a proposal. But meant as a serious talking point just the same. The pope knew papal primacy was there in the 1st millenium before the split. All the proposal did was expose a truth in a very provacative way…don’t ya think? 😉

So the question is still on the table. What happened with that proposal from the Orthodox side?
E:
I discussed this with fellow Romna Catholics at the time (I was RC then) and their take was that it was an off-hand statement which had no official status. They generally pooh-poohed it. So I don’t think you can blame Orthodox prelates for not taking it as a formal overture. If it is ever made a formal proposal, I would expect it to be taken very seriously.
Click to expand...
As an ex Catholic you know the Catholic Church doesn’t run on popular opinion. The magisterium doesn’t ask the rank and file for their vote before acting. So what happened with the proposal from your perspective?
 
steve_b said:
You’re correct, it was a proposal. But meant as a serious talking point just the same. The pope knew papal primacy was there in the 1st millenium before the split. All the proposal did was expose a truth in a very provacative way…don’t ya think? 😉
Click to expand...
The proposal obviously went nowhere because we will not be able to agree on what the papal prerogatives were in the first millennium. Were it so obvious what the papal prerogatives were, there would be complete consensus among scholars, and one church would cease to exist.
 
steve_b said:
Consider the following (my comments)
  • John 17:20-23
  • [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me; (iow Jesus prayer encompasses the Church at all levels, the hierarchy, and the rank and file Catholic in the whole world past present and future)
  • [21] That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. (is there any room in Our Lord’s will for dissent of any kind, at any level within the Church He builds? No. That includes being united with Peter. Ya know, that’s also Our Lord’s plan…agreed? #616 ]
  • [22] And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them; that they may be one, as we also are one: [23] I in them, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me. ( What Out Lord said He will build, is to be perfectly one in everything just as the Trinity is perfectly united. )
The Orthodox are
  • not united with Peter.
  • not united with each other (as Card Kasper noted).
  • not united with the (Eastern Catholics) united with Peter
Bp John makes some excellent points https://melkite.org/eparchy/bishop-j…ited-with-rome

True

At the time the proposal was made, he was head of the doctrine of the faith. The pope in effect approves what he writes before he writes it.

You’re correct, it was a proposal. But meant as a serious talking point just the same. The pope knew papal primacy was there in the 1st millenium before the split. All the proposal did was expose a truth in a very provacative way…don’t ya think? 😉

So the question is still on the table. What happened with that proposal from the Orthodox side?

As an ex Catholic you know the Catholic Church doesn’t run on popular opinion. The magisterium doesn’t ask the rank and file for their vote before acting. So what happened with the proposal from your perspective?
Click to expand...
You just said that Card. Ratzinger was really saying that the Orthodox needed to accept the Roman account of primal primacy (because, according to you, that was accepted in the first millenium). I don’t believe that Card. Ratzinger meant that, that would make him a player of verbal games, but if your account is true, why would such a proposal go anywhere? The Orthodox have already, many times, rejected the account of papal primacy laid down at Vatican I, and, believe me, they always will. Now, most Orthodox are not opposed to some form of papal primacy, so if they are ever made a serious proposal about reutrning to the ecclesiology of the first millenium, I would expect them to take it very seriously. But Vatican I ecclesiology is a non-starter.
 
1Tim215Mommy said:
Catholic Church is made up of what 27 different churches & rites, various creeds (at least 2 conflicting), multiple liturgies, multiple patriarchs, at least 2 sets of Canon Law, differing beliefs - even about the Trinity (Filioque vs. no Filioque & Christ’s 2 Natures vs. 1 Nature).

Where is the unity?

If the unity is in the person of the Pope, what’s the point of having a Pope who allows complete chaos as long as you pledge allegience to him?
Click to expand...
When u say multiple liturgies, do you mean having several Masses on Sunday or are you referring to distinct liturgies, like “The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil?”
 
Expatreprocedit said:
You just said that Card. Ratzinger was really saying that the Orthodox needed to accept the Roman account of primal primacy (because, according to you, that was accepted in the first millenium).
Click to expand...
I don’t mean to “butt in” but speaking as someone who’s conversed with Steve b many times over the last few years, it would not surprise me if that’s what he’s saying.
 
Re: the title of this thread, "Convince me", I have to say that after 17 pages of posts, I am convinced of this:
a) The OP doesn’t want to be convinced;

b) We Catholics are not capable of “convincing” the OP to join the Catholic Church, especially if no real desire to do so on her part is present. Only the Holy Spirit can work that change in her heart and only with her cooperation, because if only her intellect is somehow “convinced”, that will never be enough.

c) This discussion, as interesting as it sometimes has been, is nothing more than yet another re-hash of endless other discussions about the differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy—you know, the same old merry-go-round. Sigh. 🤷

In Christ,
MinM
 
MichaelinMD,

The thing is, I don’t think it is fair to say that we are not capable of convincing the OP to join the Catholic Church, when our policy to not to try to convert Orthodox to Catholicism – how would one know if we’re capable of it or not?
 
Peter_J said:
MichaelinMD,

The thing is, I don’t think it is fair to say that we are not capable of convincing the OP to join the Catholic Church, when our policy to not to try to convet Orthodox to Catholicism – how would one know if we’re capable of it or not?
Click to expand...
Well, you do have a point…👍

I’m aware of the “policy”, but the OP did challenge us to convince her. Why she needs this convincing is still beyond me. Anyway, even if we didn’t have a policy about not trying to convert Orthodox to the CC, it is, I believe, and always has been God who converts, not human beings. And yes, He can use us mortals as instruments in doing so if He so chooses.
 
MichaelinMD said:
Well, you do have a point…👍

I’m aware of the “policy”, but the OP did challenge us to convince her. Why she needs this convincing is still beyond me. Anyway, even if we didn’t have a policy about not trying to convert Orthodox to the CC, it is, I believe, and always has been God who converts, not human beings. And yes, He can use us mortals as instruments in doing so if He so chooses.
Click to expand...
Not sure it’s our job to “convince” anyone. She
should go where her heart takes her and if her
hearts not in it then it’s not.
 
Expatreprocedit said:
You just said that Card. Ratzinger was really saying that the Orthodox needed to accept the Roman account of primal primacy (because, according to you, that was accepted in the first millenium). I don’t believe that Card. Ratzinger meant that, that would make him a player of verbal games, but if your account is true, why would such a proposal go anywhere? The Orthodox have already, many times, rejected the account of papal primacy laid down at Vatican I, and, believe me, they always will. Now, most Orthodox are not opposed to some form of papal primacy, so if they are ever made a serious proposal about reutrning to the ecclesiology of the first millenium, I would expect them to take it very seriously. But Vatican I ecclesiology is a non-starter.
Click to expand...
Speaking of 1st century, not just 1st millenium, as I pointed out in my previous post, certainly we ought to consider Jesus prayer(s) as the litmus…agreed?
  • #616 ] 31“Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you (plural) as wheat. 32But I have prayed for you,(singular) Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen [στήρισον (http://bibleapps.com/greek/4741.htm) your brothers.” We also see in Luke’s Gospel in the same context, that Jesus confirms that Peter is the greatest among THEM, and that Peter is to have [ἡγούμενος (http://bibleapps.com/greek/2233.htm) over them. Which presumes, that in order for Peter to do what Jesus wants of him, the apostles are to follow Peter and his lead… agreed? Notice the definition of [ἡγούμενος (http://bibleapps.com/greek/2233.htm) ?
  1. to lead
    a. to go before;
b. to be a leader; to rule, command; to have authority over:
I’ve asked this question many times over the years. I haven’t gotten an answer yet. Maybe you have the answer.

Q: When is the 1st time we see “Orthodox Church” in writing in historical record? Reference(s) properly documented…please.
 
1Tim215Mommy said:
Orthodoxy has been 100% united in our Liturgy & Faith.
Click to expand...
I am not sure if this is true. For example, some Orthodox believe in toll houses; others do not. Similarly, some Orthodox believe that a priest must be married before ordination and do not allow it after ordination, whereas in Russia exceptions have been made in the case of a priest in the countryside whose wife has died and left several children. Also, some Orthodox believe that the Julian calendar must be used for theological reasons, whereas others do not believe that the issue is a theological one and agree to the Revised Julian calendar, which is really the Gregorian calendar with a tiny tinkering that will not appear for thousands of years from now. And some Orthodox oppose any prayer with non-Orthodox whereas you will find the more liberal Orthodox engaging in prayer with the Greek Catholics as was seen for example in the Maidan square in Ukraine. Further, some Orthodox will accept Roman Catholics by a simple act of faith alone, whereas others will require a rebaptism. Some Orthodox say that RC Sacraments are filled with grace, whereas others will say no. Some Orthodox oppose ABC, while others allow it.
 
Expatreprocedit said:
You just said that Card. Ratzinger was really saying that the Orthodox needed to accept the Roman account of primal primacy (because, according to you, that was accepted in the first millenium). … [snip] …if your account is true, why would such a proposal go anywhere? The Orthodox have already, many times, rejected the account of papal primacy laid down at Vatican I, and, believe me, they always will
Click to expand...
when is the 1st time we see “Orthodox Church” in writing in an historical Church document. You are suggesting there was an “Orthodox Church” in the 1st millenium. All I’m asking for, is the Church reference(s) properly documented, showing when that was. That’s all I’m asking for.

I’ve asked that question many times over the years and haven’t gotten an answer …yet… from any Orthodox poster. I say “yet” because maybe the reference is out there and maybe you have that reference.
E:
Now, most Orthodox are not opposed to some form of papal primacy, so if they are ever made a serious proposal about reutrning to the ecclesiology of the first millenium, I would expect them to take it very seriously.
Click to expand...
Again, please show me “when” is the first time we see “Orthodox Church” in history, written in a primary historical Church document…properly referenced of course. That’s all I’m asking for.
E:
But Vatican I ecclesiology is a non-starter.
Click to expand...
What about the council of Florence 400 years earlier?
 
Tomdstone said:
I am not sure if this is true. For example, some Orthodox believe in toll houses; others do not. Similarly, some Orthodox believe that a priest must be married before ordination and do not allow it after ordination, whereas in Russia exceptions have been made in the case of a priest in the countryside whose wife has died and left several children. Also, some Orthodox believe that the Julian calendar must be used for theological reasons, whereas others do not believe that the issue is a theological one and agree to the Revised Julian calendar, which is really the Gregorian calendar with a tiny tinkering that will not appear for thousands of years from now. And some Orthodox oppose any prayer with non-Orthodox whereas you will find the more liberal Orthodox engaging in prayer with the Greek Catholics as was seen for example in the Maidan square in Ukraine. Further, some Orthodox will accept Roman Catholics by a simple act of faith alone, whereas others will require a rebaptism. Some Orthodox say that RC Sacraments are filled with grace, whereas others will say no. Some Orthodox oppose ABC, while others allow it.
Click to expand...
I like your response. You took the time to give examples to support your point.

I have one question Re: ABC. I wasn’t aware some Orthodox oppose it. I thought they all went along with it. Do you know which Orthodox specifically oppose it? Thanks in advance.
 
steve_b said:
I like your response. You took the time to give examples to support your point.

I have one question Re: ABC. I wasn’t aware some Orthodox oppose it. I thought they all went along with it. Do you know which Orthodox specifically oppose it? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Bishop Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church, for example, is opposed to ABC:
antiochian.org/node/17198
Orthodox wiki mentions others who are also opposed:
Bp. Artemije of Kosovo [SOC], Fr. Josiah Trenham, Fr. Patrick Reardon, Fr. John Schroedel, Fr. John A. Peck and Fr. Patrick Danielson.
orthodoxwiki.org/Contraception#Synopsis
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top