V
Vico
Guest
Andrew, have you heard anything about the Ukrainian Orthodox relationship with the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Diocese of Mukacheve?
- Status
J
jdwood983
Guest
Look at this site: bible.cc/1_corinthians/11-27.htm
Most translations us or and not and.
Now I don’t read Greek, but this site does a translation word for word: biblos.com/1_corinthians/11-27.htm
They say it’s or.
B
bmadamsberry
Guest
Hello,
I live near a Greek Orthodox church, and am friends with some of the members (including the priest).
I am speaking from experiance (and everyone knows that one’s experiance does not necessarily reflect the wide spread belief), but the members of the Greek Orthodox do not want reunification. They see it as joining the Roman Catholic Church, and nothing could be worse to them. In fact, it took quite a while before they and I became friends (I was VERY put off by them, because they were very arrogent, rude, and mean about their beliefs. They tried to proselytize me, which there is an unspoken rule about in regards to Orthodox and Catholic).
I think, though, that there are many misunderstandings in regards to reunification of the two Churches. If the two Churches joined together, both Churches would cease to exist. There would be no Roman Catholic Church and there would be no Orthodox Church. There would be one Church, as it was before the Great Schism (this is not to say that the Church ceased to exist after the G.S., but rather it continued along two different paths).
This is also something important to remember, and that is that BOTH Churches have valid ordinations, and so the apostolic succession continues in BOTH Churches. Therefore, in MY opinion (I don’t think this is an official position of either Church) neither Church has any incorrect doctrine. Rather, both Churches were protected from error. This would therefore mean that doctrines that seem to contradict each other are not actual contradictions, but rather the same thing either expressed in different ways or parts of a whole (for example, Original Sin and Ancestral Sin [refered to as different things]. These two things are not contradictory, but are actually complementary).
Anyway, I’ve strayed off-topic so I apologize. But, like I said, in my opinion reunification is misunderstoof by both Churches, and that if an Orthodox doesn’t want it then it’s because they see it as a submission and if a Catholic doesn’t want it it’s because they see it as a compromise.
P.S. If anyone disagrees with anything I’ve put, or would like to ask further questions or talk about what I put, please message me because my post got a little off-topic and I don’t want to hijack the thread.
I live near a Greek Orthodox church, and am friends with some of the members (including the priest).
I am speaking from experiance (and everyone knows that one’s experiance does not necessarily reflect the wide spread belief), but the members of the Greek Orthodox do not want reunification. They see it as joining the Roman Catholic Church, and nothing could be worse to them. In fact, it took quite a while before they and I became friends (I was VERY put off by them, because they were very arrogent, rude, and mean about their beliefs. They tried to proselytize me, which there is an unspoken rule about in regards to Orthodox and Catholic).
I think, though, that there are many misunderstandings in regards to reunification of the two Churches. If the two Churches joined together, both Churches would cease to exist. There would be no Roman Catholic Church and there would be no Orthodox Church. There would be one Church, as it was before the Great Schism (this is not to say that the Church ceased to exist after the G.S., but rather it continued along two different paths).
This is also something important to remember, and that is that BOTH Churches have valid ordinations, and so the apostolic succession continues in BOTH Churches. Therefore, in MY opinion (I don’t think this is an official position of either Church) neither Church has any incorrect doctrine. Rather, both Churches were protected from error. This would therefore mean that doctrines that seem to contradict each other are not actual contradictions, but rather the same thing either expressed in different ways or parts of a whole (for example, Original Sin and Ancestral Sin [refered to as different things]. These two things are not contradictory, but are actually complementary).
Anyway, I’ve strayed off-topic so I apologize. But, like I said, in my opinion reunification is misunderstoof by both Churches, and that if an Orthodox doesn’t want it then it’s because they see it as a submission and if a Catholic doesn’t want it it’s because they see it as a compromise.
P.S. If anyone disagrees with anything I’ve put, or would like to ask further questions or talk about what I put, please message me because my post got a little off-topic and I don’t want to hijack the thread.
V
Volodymyr
Guest
Vico;6242108 said:
1
1holycatholic
Guest
How did this thread drift from reunification to the merits of Utraquism? 
M
malphono
Guest
And without the “help” of a true Oecumenical Council.
I
Ignatios
Guest
Thank you for this site, It can help me with my studies.
So, it is true most of them are “OR” But the most accurate translation in the NT is the KJV.
I also looked up the Arabic version that I have and it was translated by the Coptic Catholic and it was confirmed by both Orthodox and Catholic. It also says “and”.
However, the site that you gave me it says the following, and I like to follow that thread and study it further, because it is interesting what we stumbled on, but here what it says:
"Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
- eat and drink-So one of the oldest manuscripts reads. But three or four equally old manuscripts, the Vulgate and Cyprian, read, “or.” Romanists quote this reading in favor of communion in one kind. This consequence does not follow. Paul says, “Whosoever is guilty of unworthy conduct, either in eating the bread, or in drinking the cup, is guilty of the body and blood of Christ.” Impropriety in only one of the two elements, vitiates **true communion in both. Therefore, in the end of the verse, he says, not “body or blood,” but “body and blood.” Any who takes the bread without the wine, or the wine without the bread, “unworthily” communicates, and so “is guilty of Christ’s body and blood”; for he disobeys Christ’s express command to partake of both. **If we do not partake of the sacramental symbol of the Lord’s death worthily, we share in the guilt of that death. (Compare “crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,” Heb 6:6). Unworthiness …
bible.cc/1_corinthians/11-27.htm
So any RC who is receiving the Eucharist at least try to ask your priest or bishop to receive both.
GOD bless you all †††
1
1holycatholic
Guest
How is a Protestant Bile commentary a reliable source for information about any of the various Eastern Orthodox?
I
Ignatios
Guest
Or maybe you should ask your RC brother/sister the one who provided this link and used it to justify the one host in your church, that is by directing this question to him/her " How is a Protestant Bile commentary a reliable source for information about any of the*** various*** Catholic Churches".
How is a Protestant Bile commentary a reliable source for information about any of the various Eastern Orthodox?
Just in case you missed the obvious posting of your brother/sister RC: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6242471&postcount=42
I only used what was provided by a RC, besides I did not say that it is reliable source, I just simply posted the things that it relates to both words"or" and “and”, where your brother/sister posted parts that it strengthen his point while leaving the part that it refute it.
besides what are you trying to point to by saying the “various Eastern Orthodox”?
If I read you right, yes there is various Eastern Orthodox Churches, BUT the Faith is one and the Divine Liturgy is one and the Tradition is one and the same, is there different customs or (t)raditions? yes, different nationality? yes. different opinion about non-faith related issues, yes isn’t this the way that the Apostles establish the Churches, different Churches with one Bishop in each to oversee? yes indeed.
GOD bless †††
K
KyivAndrew
Guest
EXACTLY Andrew!
The Ukrainian Orthodox like the Ukrainian Catholic realize that the Orthodox Moscow Patriarch is to a significant extent a political tool in the hands of the Leader of Russia. Certain Orthodox in Ukraine never learned their history growing up in the Soviet Union as you did, I assume, in Australia. They grew up, as one poster on CAF once said, on the belief that Ukrainians were not a people, or nation, or distinct in language but were only to be looked down upon. To a significant extent this is the view of the current Patriarch of Moscow who on a recent trip to Ukraine had his p.r. executive encourage Ukrainians to call themselves “malorossy” or “Little Russians” as opposed to the proper Ukrainian, as if it was not a nation. Talk about Imperial Politics trumping Religion - exactly as you stated what the Moscow Patriarch’s objections are - political.I agree with your description of who to identify with in Ukraine as Orthodox. I am glad the Ecumenical Patriarch got involved with this. After all, the Kyivan Orthodox Church was originally under the jurisdiction of Constantinople until, under duress from Moscow, the Ukrainian Orthodox were forced to fall under the Muscovite Church. I mean even to this day the Russian Orthodox Church pronounces anathema on Hetman Mazepa! I am sure as a knowledgeable Ukrainian Orthodox you would find this wrong as do I.
With you there is a “spilna mova” and hope for reunification. I do not want to see Moscow acting as a 3rd Rome trying to get in the way of this. That is why I am glad for your support of our Church as we support you.
May God Bless You!
C
Cecilianus
Guest
Ilyusha, how is a celibate priesthood “heretical”? You also have celibate priests - hieromonks and bishops - and the Armenians have celibate vardapets. We also have married priests - usually former Protestant ministers or Eastern Catholic priests. There is nothing heretical about requiring a priest to devote himself entirely to the sacrificial ministry. Celibacy is a beautiful vocation, and as Orthodox you ought to know that, given the centrality your church places on monasticism.
I do lament Communion in the hand, however - but it does not make someone heretical; it was never an issue for the Orthodox before 1054, even though it was practice in the Latin Church from the very beginning until that date. (If not, please correct me - I would love for that to be wrong. It would help incredibly in the debate with liberal Catholics.)
Likewise, I don’t think that you can accurately say that Orthodoxy rejects the Immaculate Conception. It was a Greek tradition - taught by St. Gregory Palamas and St. Peter Mohila, and a number of standard manuals of dogmatic theology used by Orthodox seminaries - and, in fact, it was because it was viewed as simply a Greek rather than a universal tradition that it took so long to be defined by the Catholic Church.
Having an identity of “non-Catholic” seems to me very unhealthy - schism is an ecclesiastical sin, and the desire to perpetuate the state is a personal sin, whether for a Catholic or for Orthodox. Christ prayed that we may all be one. It would be much healthier to glorify in the actual characteristics of Orthodoxy, since Orthodoxy (unlike Protestantism) actually has a positive character other than a simple rejection of Catholicism.
1
1holycatholic
Guest
A Protestant Bible commentary isn’t a reliable source for information about the Catholic Church either.Or maybe you should ask your RC brother/sister the one who provided this link and used it to justify the one host in your church, that is by directing this question to him/her " How is a Protestant Bile commentary a reliable source for information about any of the*** various*** Catholic Churches".
Just in case you missed the obvious posting of your brother/sister RC: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6242471&postcount=42
I only used what was provided by a RC, besides I did not say that it is reliable source, I just simply posted the things that it relates to both words"or" and “and”, where your brother/sister posted parts that it strengthen his point while leaving the part that it refute it.
besides what are you trying to point to by saying the “various Eastern Orthodox”?
If I read you right, yes there is various Eastern Orthodox Churches, BUT the Faith is one and the Divine Liturgy is one and the Tradition is one and the same, is there different customs or (t)raditions? yes, different nationality? yes. different opinion about non-faith related issues, yes isn’t this the way that the Apostles establish the Churches, different Churches with one Bishop in each to oversee? yes indeed.
GOD bless †††
It’s not accurate to claim “Eastern Orthodoxy” as one particular body. If the faith is one then why aren’t they all in communion with each other? There’s as much finger pointing and claims of heresy among the various Eastern Orthodox as there is antipathy towards the Catholic Church.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I can’t speak for the Orthodox leaders. All I know is what I have read on here, as posted by Orthodox people.
There are some exceptions, I’ll grant, but I would say that very few Orthodox have any interest at all in reunification. Generally speaking, Catholics have been taught to respect the Orthodox churches, and most desire reunification. I don’t think either thing has been taught to most Orthodox.
It isn’t all a matter of doctrine, either. Certainly, the authority of the Pope is an almost insurmountable obstacle for the Orthodox. But it goes beyond that. Orthodox consider Catholics “heretical”; a sort of renegade sect that has had unwarranted and illicit councils. To many Orthodox (I’m not sure if it’s “most”) even Catholic baptisms are doubtful. All other sacraments are considered invalid. Many, or perhaps most, Orthodox consider Catholics no more members of the “true Church” than Catholics think of Mormons in that way.
But beyond that, territoriality is a serious issue with at least some Orthodox I have met on here. Basically, the Orthodox consider that the Catholic Church can be worthy of reunification only if it becomes Orthodox in every way. Among other things, that would reduce the “jurisdiction” of the Pope to the City of Rome and some outlying areas in Italy. To be even the bishop of Rome, the Pope would either have to be deposed or somehow converted and re-apppointed by the Orthodox bishops. Otherwise, he’s “just a guy”. The Catholic Church would have to retreat from all the rest of the world. Territoriality is a serious issue between Orthodox themselves, but as between them and the Catholic Church it’s an absolute barrier.
Now, as a Catholic in America, I could not possibly accept being told that to be a member of the True Church I would have to reject my priest, my bishop, my liturgies, my marriage and perhaps even my baptism, and see the Catholic Church banished totally from this country. I would return to the hedgerows like my Irish ancestors before I would do that.
So, while one can think of reunification as a desirable thing, and one must think it, I am pretty sure it will never happen in my lifetime. Before I read the posts of Orthodox on here, and I have read a lot of them in other threads, I thought maybe it could happen. I no longer do.
There are some exceptions, I’ll grant, but I would say that very few Orthodox have any interest at all in reunification. Generally speaking, Catholics have been taught to respect the Orthodox churches, and most desire reunification. I don’t think either thing has been taught to most Orthodox.
It isn’t all a matter of doctrine, either. Certainly, the authority of the Pope is an almost insurmountable obstacle for the Orthodox. But it goes beyond that. Orthodox consider Catholics “heretical”; a sort of renegade sect that has had unwarranted and illicit councils. To many Orthodox (I’m not sure if it’s “most”) even Catholic baptisms are doubtful. All other sacraments are considered invalid. Many, or perhaps most, Orthodox consider Catholics no more members of the “true Church” than Catholics think of Mormons in that way.
But beyond that, territoriality is a serious issue with at least some Orthodox I have met on here. Basically, the Orthodox consider that the Catholic Church can be worthy of reunification only if it becomes Orthodox in every way. Among other things, that would reduce the “jurisdiction” of the Pope to the City of Rome and some outlying areas in Italy. To be even the bishop of Rome, the Pope would either have to be deposed or somehow converted and re-apppointed by the Orthodox bishops. Otherwise, he’s “just a guy”. The Catholic Church would have to retreat from all the rest of the world. Territoriality is a serious issue between Orthodox themselves, but as between them and the Catholic Church it’s an absolute barrier.
Now, as a Catholic in America, I could not possibly accept being told that to be a member of the True Church I would have to reject my priest, my bishop, my liturgies, my marriage and perhaps even my baptism, and see the Catholic Church banished totally from this country. I would return to the hedgerows like my Irish ancestors before I would do that.
So, while one can think of reunification as a desirable thing, and one must think it, I am pretty sure it will never happen in my lifetime. Before I read the posts of Orthodox on here, and I have read a lot of them in other threads, I thought maybe it could happen. I no longer do.
I
Ignatios
Guest
Then wouldn’t your words be better off directed to the one who uses this i.e. your RC brother.? and not me? I didn’t see you saying anything to him when he used it to fortify the RC position, sheesh.!!!
we are one Body with different members, could you present us with an example so we can have a picture what you are referring to?
Example?
The antipathy is on both sides, and I am sure that each party has his own reasons, BUT, it is definitely not an Orthodox Teaching. But I hope that your standard of hatred is not like the many RC here on this forum, that they call Catholic haters everyone who does not agree with them.
GOD Bless you all †††
1
1holycatholic
Guest
I didn’t notice it in a previous post. I would have mentioned it had I seen it.
Old Calendarists.
C
Cecilianus
Guest
Can you give an example of antipathy Catholics have towards Orthodox? We have all been taught to love Orthodoxy and desire the return of the Orthodox to the bosom of the Church. But I’ve seen and read plenty of antipathy on the part of the Orthodox to Catholics. I once even tried to express interest in Orthodoxy hoping that they would try to convert me - just because I wanted to know more about - but they acted too disdainful to even care about converting me enough to explain their practices to me. The most I got was being called a “schismatic” without any explanation as to where the visible Church is that I’m in schism from. (All I see are a group of particular Churches: Greek Orthodox, up to three or four Russian Orthodox, three Ukrainian Orthodox, and dozens of separate Orthodox churches which use the Julian calendar, and dozens more sects of “Old Believers”.)
And the only book I got recommended to me was Timothy Ware’s “The Orthodox Church”, which is so nauseatingly anti-Catholic that I’m not sure whether they meant it as anything more than a personal insult. Other Orthodox books that I’ve read all seem to have an irrationally obsessive hatred for Western Christianity - but aside from a little bit of superciliousness on the part of Fr. Fortescue, I’ve never read a disrespectful word from Catholics towards the Orthodox.
I
Ignatius
Guest
So, it is not only the Latin Catholics that think their side are all right and the other side are all wrong.
C
Cecilianus
Guest
I was told by the Serbian Orthodox that the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople is an apostate. And then you’ve got the Old Believers, the three rival Ukrainian Orthodox churches, the different approaches to Catholic sacraments (some accept them, most regard them as invalid), the quarrel between Constantinople and Moscow over jurisdiction in places like Estonia, the ROCOR/Russian Orthodox schism, the arguments over the Toll Houses, the “non-canonical” Orthodox (who have just as much right as far as I can tell to ordain their own bishops and create autocephalous churches as any other) and Old Believers (who sure look Orthodox to me, and who have just as much right as far as I can tell - without a supreme authority to arbiter - to reject the Orthodox as heretics as the Orthodox did to reject the Catholics), etc.
J
josephdaniel29
Guest
The same reason all of the various Catholic groups aren’t in communion with each other. St Paul told us it would be this way (1 Corinthians 11:19) and it has in fact been this way from the very beginning.
Why are you so surprised?
Yours in Christ
Joe
I
Ignatios
Guest
But ironically, you noticed mine.
Old Calendarists.
By this standard, the same applies to your church since there is also some Catholic churches that they still follow the old Calendar as well, not to mention the RCC in Antioch celebrate Pascha( Easter) according to the the Julian Calendar also the Catholics in Jordan and some Melkite in Lebanon and Syria etc…
- Status