Divorce and the Greek-Orthodox

  • Thread starter Thread starter YAA23
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not everything that has been believed by Christians in the history of the Church is a legitimate belief. For example, there was a time in Church history when the majority of Eastern bishops accepted the heresy of Arianism.
 
How can you accuse me of this when today is the first day of my life that I have ever heard someone claim that ‘divine energies’ are a part of Eastern Catholic beliefs? :confused: If someone can provide a Vatican document which approves of this I would appreciate it.
 
livingwordunity said:
Then why were you saying that Eastern Catholics are treated bad in the West if you have no complaints? :confused:
Click to expand...
None of my complaints were with how we are currently treated by Rome. The problems I have with how we are currently treated have to do with the way we are treated by some Latin Catholics, including some who are priests, and bishops and even a few cardinals. Your point about this being the work of dissidents, and therefore not tolerated rings rather hollow, since we constantly live with it.
 
livingwordunity said:
How can you accuse me of this when today is the first day of my life that I have ever heard someone claim that ‘divine energies’ are a part of Eastern Catholic beliefs? :confused:
Click to expand...
This shows how little you know about Eastern Catholic traditions.
 
How about showing me a Vatican document to help with my ignorance? :tiphat:
 
Its mentioned on the USCCB sight.

“Gregory Palamas proposed a similar interpretation of this relationship in a number of his works; in his Confession of 1351, for instance, he asserts that the Holy Spirit “has the Father as foundation, source, and cause,” but “reposes in the Son” and “is sent – that is, manifested – through the Son.” (ibid. 194) In terms of the transcendent divine energy, although not in terms of substance or hypostatic being, “the Spirit pours itself out from the Father through the Son, and, if you like, from the Son over all those worthy of it,” a communica*tion which may even be broadly called “procession” (ekporeusis) (Apodeictic Treatise 1: trans. J. Meyendorff, A Study of Gregory Palamas [St. Vladimir’s, 1974] 231-232).”

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/ecumenical/orthodox/filioque-church-dividing-issue-english.cfm
 
Okay. What I think throws me off is how there are some (not talking about Eastern Catholics) who claim to be “catholic” but who aren’t in communion with Rome. For example, there’s someone who posts on CAF who says he is a part of the “American Catholic Church” which he says is not in communion with Rome. He also calls it ‘Old Catholic’. I know this has nothing to do with Eastern Catholic churches, but the many uses of the name ‘catholic’ still throws me off. I think I can accept what Ryan has been saying. Perhaps, despite the attempts in Catholic media to promote Eastern Catholicism and educate Western Catholics about it, there remains misunderstandings about it due to ignorance on the part of lay people like me who are not too familiar with Eastern Catholicism.
 
RyanBlack said:
None of my complaints were with how we are currently treated by Rome. The problems I have with how we are currently treated have to do with the way we are treated by some Latin Catholics, including some who are priests, and bishops and even a few cardinals. Your point about this being the work of dissidents, and therefore not tolerated rings rather hollow, since we constantly live with it.
Click to expand...
His posts seem to prove your point.
 
Nine_Two said:
His posts seem to prove your point.
Click to expand...
But isn’t it true that Eastern Catholics are even less accepted by the Eastern Orthodox? My problem was a simple misunderstanding (which got resolved quickly). I never said that I had a problem with Eastern Catholics. So, who is being less accepting of Eastern Catholics? Latin rite Catholics may not always understand them, but at least we accept them as being in communion with us.
 
RyanBlack said:
I think I, as an Eastern Catholic, am in a better position than you, who are not an Eastern Catholic, to know how Eastern Catholics have been, and in some cases, still are treated. I am aware of how recent popes have treated Eastern Catholics. I am also aware that there is more to history than the last few decades, and that even now, we endure poor treatment. We have had legitimate traditions, such as a married presbyterate, suppressed. There are still pressures within Rome for us not to ordain married men to the presbyterate. On a personal level, we constantly deal with ignorance, and in some cases, outright hostility, from some Latin Catholics. For example, I have been told that our belief in gods divine energies is “New Age” heresy. My wife was once told that our belief in theosis is “blasphemous.” We are not infrequently told that our fasting traditions are “dumb.” All of this not from atheists or even Protestants, but from Latin Catholics. I can add more. I’ve read criticisms of Eastern Catholic because we don’t pray the Rosary, we don’t have Stations of the Cross, we don’t have statues, just those weird-looking icons, we don’t have daily Mass, we have face-to-face confession, our use of leavened bread for communion is invalid, we dare to chrismate and commune our infants, and so on.
Click to expand...
I have been an Eastern Catholic for a very long time. (Starost ne radost), I really don’t have any of the experience with Latin Catholics such as you relate. Most people respond very quickly to new information. The stubborn ones? I don’t dispute your experience, or the possibility - I just don’t hang around much with them. Why spend time with someone who might argue heatedly without any substantive knowledge? Life is short.
 
livingwordunity said:
Exactly, if all one goes by is the writing of their select favorite ancient Christian then what is to stop someone from following a heretic like Arius, for example?
Click to expand...
There is a world of difference between Arius and St. Basil the Great. According to pope Benedict XIV in De Canonizatione, as a matter of fact, the doctrine of St. Basil the Great cannot be impugned by faithful Catholics, for he is considered to be a doctor of the Church.
 
Cavaradossi said:
There is a world of difference between Arius and St. Basil the Great. According to pope Benedict XIV in De Canonizatione, as a matter of fact, the doctrine of St. Basil the Great cannot be impugned by faithful Catholics, for he is considered to be a doctor of the Church.
Click to expand...
LWU was responding to this:
Not even the Pope is infallible. The Pope is only infallible when he speaks ex-cathedra and the Magisterium in communion with the Pope. The Fathers of the Church are not infallible. Their writings is not at the level of Sacred Scripture.
Click to expand...
They did not always agree with each other. What would be inconsistent is to adopt a body of knowledge that is inconsistent within itself and most importantly; inconsistent with the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church.”
Click to expand...
I am delighted that you agree with LWU and cite a pope to epitomize the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church.
 
RyanBlack said:
That question would be better answered by someone other than me. I honestly do not know. I can say that if they are not well accepted, Catholics are hardly in a position to criticize, given the shameful history of how Eastern Catholics have often be treated, and in some cases, still are treated, by Latin Catholics.
Click to expand...
And we regret that shameful history, Ryan, i.e., we cannot erase the past but we are doing what we can to rectify it, in fact, pope John Paul II apologized for the misdeeds of Latin Catholics publicly as means of atoning and building new bridges. But do not say that I as a Latin Catholic cannot criticize, and I’ll explain why, there are quite a few Orthodox who look down upon Eastern Catholics for having united with Rome (even referring to them in a pejorative manner). Now I find this highly offensive to say the least, however, it would be ironic (even hypocritical) wouldn’t you say, if indeed, Western rite Orthodox Churches were/are not autonomous, don’t have their own canon or seminaries, and are under a Byzantine bishop. It’s something to think about (and research).

p.s. I have not nor ever witnessed an Eastern Catholic maltreated by a Latin Catholic, and I can assure that if I did, I would do something about it. Moreover, LivingWordUnity is correct in saying that on many Catholic channels like EWTN and other forms of media, Eastern Catholicism is being promulgated.
 
RyanBlack said:
None of my complaints were with how we are currently treated by Rome. The problems I have with how we are currently treated have to do with the way we are treated by some Latin Catholics, including some who are priests, and bishops and even a few cardinals. Your point about this being the work of dissidents, and therefore not tolerated rings rather hollow, since we constantly live with it.
Click to expand...
There are also priests who harmed children and bishops who covered it up, my point being that you will find those few who are ignorant, possibly malicious. I cannot rightly say as I do not know them, but I think you need to focus on the good rather than the bad, i.e., I’m sure there are a few bad apples but the rest of us respect and admire our Eastern brethren.
 
Is this an actual Catholic group (separated from the Church) or are they being satirical?
 
livingwordunity said:
But isn’t it true that Eastern Catholics are even less accepted by the Eastern Orthodox? My problem was a simple misunderstanding (which got resolved quickly). I never said that I had a problem with Eastern Catholics. So, who is being less accepting of Eastern Catholics? Latin rite Catholics may not always understand them, but at least we accept them as being in communion with us.
Click to expand...
This line of conversation began as a comparison between Orthodox treatment of Western Rite vs. Catholic treatment of Eastern Catholics. A comparison that is quite apt. We both have our zealots who hold the respective minority in contempt on the basis of misunderstandings.

I’m not understanding why Eastern Catholics should be particularly accepted by Orthodox. That’s a bit like saying Anglicans should be accepted by Roman Catholics. They share our traditions, and a great deal of our history, but they have chosen Rome over the Orthodox Communion and by that act have separated themselves from us. History has shown (through the likes of ACROD or St. Alexis of Wilkes-Barre, as well as individual examples) that we are very accepting of those who wish to return to us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top