D
dzheremi
Guest
That was the calm version.Calm down, nobody is attacking you or calling you a heretic
No it isnât.
So you say, but do you know either communion well enough to actually judge that yourself? If you did, you would see why it is not an apt comparison.
As I wrote in my reply, that is the only level at which they are comparable: Somebody said that they must accept these councils, and they said no. The substance of the rejection, that is to say the issues surrounding the respective councils and the reasons for their rejection by those who rejected them, are completely different and wholly unrelated to one another (as would be expected, as there is such a large lapse in time between Chalcedon and the two later councils you are asking about). Heck, Chalcedon is such a rabbit hole that the reasons within what would become known as the âOriental Orthodoxâ communion differ between the individual churches, and the circumstances by which each came to reject the council are not uniform across the communion â e.g., the Armenians did not reject Chalcedon at the same time or place as the Egyptians, nor for all the same reasons (it is telling that the Armenians do not venerate our teacher HH St. Dioscorus, and as far as I can tell never have). So while I am in no way fit to judge the appropriateness of asking EO about their rejection of Florence and Lyons II, there really is nothing to gain by throwing Chalcedon in with them.
By that logic, I might as well point out that clearly theyâre not Oriental Orthodox, so theyâre not fit to answer the question, either. (This isnât their fault, though; it is a sign that it is a malformed question.)
Yeah, I ignored that bit. The Eastern Catholics may answer for themselves. The Byzantine Chalcedonians are much less well-equipped to answer for the non-Chalcedonians, as discussed below.
Prefacing a rude statement with ânot to be rudeâ doesnât make that statement not rude. Might I suggest in a friendly, not ranting manner that asking about Oriental Orthodox rejection of a council (or Oriental Orthodox anything) ex opere operato invites Oriental Orthodox response, as it is inappropriate to leave such matters to be answered by those outside of the communion, particularly given the still highly contentious nature of Chalcedon as it relates to either communionâs acceptance of the other. You would be right, or at least logical, not to seek or expect a fair hearing from a Protestant on those matters that are most obviously contentious in Protestant-Catholic relations, and surely if someone was to take a Protestantâs explanation of Roman Catholic views on said matters, you would most reasonably interject that even with the best of intentions the explanation is likely not to be of the same quality or reflecting the same ethos as one would find in the explanation of an actual Roman Catholic. The Chalcedonian Byzantines are not Protestants, of course, but the same applies here. Likewise, if you were to ask me about hesychasm, or toll houses, or iconoclasm, or anything else that developed in the Byzantine Chalcedonian Orthodox Church subsequent to the members of my communion more or less being exiled stage left, I could try to give whatever kind of answer that I could find, but I would place very little confidence in it and youâd be better off just asking one of them directly. On this board, as in life, they are much more numerous than the non-Chalcedonians are, so I do not feel that it is in the slightest bit inappropriate to step up and attempt to stop another badly-designed thread from heaping scorn on my communion for essentially no reason. The question could be asked without any reference to non-Chalcedonians (and certainly without the ancient âMonophysiteâ slander), or Chalcedon itself, and really it would be a better question for having dropped any such attempted connection â a more informative and deeper question, for the reasons Iâve already elaborated on at length.
Please do not ask questions you do not actually want answers to.