Do you support union of Catholic and Orthodox Churches?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sidbrown
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
🤷

Breaking unity with Peter Chair was caused by Rome. Do you think it was Right that Rome in 1054 AD decided to elevate there Pope from primacy to supremacy. Then Forcing
This on the Eastern church along with the filioque:shrug:
Then to strengthen the split Rome Since has brought in a load more new teachings.
I suppose you could say it was in one sense the Pope’s fault, since it is his job to keep the Church together. But if others won’t cooperate, I don’t know what he can do. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.

I don’t think the Pope made the decision to elevate himself from primacy to supremacy in 1054. I don’t think a decision in that form was ever made. Suffice it to say that the Church has never claimed for the Pope any more than Christ gave him. There may have been times when the Popes could have had better manners, but that’s not a good reason for a thousand year schism. (I leave off a discussion of the Sack of Constantinople, since you don’t mention it.)

The Church didn’t bring in new teachings in the sense of making things up out of whole cloth. Everything the Church has said down through history has been a natural development based on what went before, guided by the Holy Spirit. I assure you, no doctrines have been enunciated with an eye to strengthening the split. Why would the Catholics do that? We’re the ones that keep asking the Orthodox if they want to reunite, while the Patriarch of Moscow won’t even allow the Pope in Russia.

I don’t think even Charlemagne tried to impose the Filioque on the East. Prove positive that the Church doesn’t think it is essential is that the Eastern Catholics aren’t required to say it. But there sure are a lot of Orthodox Christians who say I’m a heretic for believing it.
 
While I appreciate your truthfulness in your views, it does indicate a certain level of ignorance either regarding what Protestants are, or what Orthodox are. If a Protestant is simply someone who rejects the supreme authority of the pope, then yes, guilty as charged, but so are a great number of Catholics throughout the ages, possibly the majority. Ultramontanism is indeed a rather new movement which as far as I can tell, only originated in the Italy of the 18th century.

You are of course welcome to your views.
Well, it’s not just rejection of the Pope, but a certain circularity of reasoning, as I have posted elsewhere.
 
Many Protestants do find the term insulting.
Then it is true, you didn’t pay attention to anything I was saying regarding tradition?

I put a questionmark there but it isn’t a question.

Funny, you admitted coming in here believing we saw something as a central authority, were told otherwise, seemed to accept that, but now are going on about how we do infact accept something as a central authority.

You have expressed yourself just fine. Now having read this post I must conclude your ignorance is willful, having put in place of the things you were told, the things which you believed prior to entering this thread.
I didn’t realize that there were Protestants that don’t like to be called Protestants. Well, I guess I’ll have to deal with that when I call one of them a Protestant.

So, now, by willful ignorance, do you mean that I have deliberately chosen not to be informed of something? What?

Was my saying that you take as authority tradition in accordance with your Orthodox faith a claim that you were taking something as a central authority? On the contrary. All I’ve done is point out that accepting tradition based on the faith based on tradition, etc., is circular. Now you’re getting mad.
 
OK if the procession of the holy Spirit came from both the father and the Son Simultaneously. Does that mean Jesus Christ the ā€˜ā€˜Word’’ became flesh also with the father Impregnate his own mother:confused: When the holy spirit Impregnated Mary??
Or did the holy spirit Just proceed from the Father when it (name removed by moderator)regnated Mary
Here’s a quote from the Catechism:

ā€˜258 The whole divine economy is the common work of the three divine persons. For as the Trinity has only one and the same natures so too does it have only one and the same operation: ā€œThe Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not three principles of creation but one principle.ā€ However, each divine person performs the common work according to his unique personal property.’

So I would say the whole Trinity was involved with the Incarnation. It was the Holy Spirit who was directly involved with the Blessed Mother’s impregnation. He would have proceeded from the Father and the Son in the same manner as he always did. The Son was the Son of the Father then as before and afterward. So, if you’re asking if the Son was his own father at the Incarnation, I would say no more than the Holy Spirit was.
 
The Roman Church was a beacon of right belief even before a strict monarchical episcopal structure became the norm. It was where St. Paul and St. Peter were both martyred, and where numerous Christians had suffered for the true Faith.

St. Irenaeus does precede his comment on Rome with reference to Apostolic succession in all the Churches. He adds that due to space limitations he will only focus on the great Church of Rome, founded by the two glorious Apostles, St. Paul and St. Peter.
Yes, and it is the Church with which all must agree.
 
The same kind of circularity may be charged against Catholics for that matter. The Pope says he has supreme authority because it is Catholic Tradition since the beginning that Christ gave St. Peter the keys, etc. Yet who delineates what is this Catholic Tradition, how it is to be interpreted, and the authority given in it? The Popes. I would think Catholics, however, understand a mystery greater than this logic.

Truth has authority, and those who speak in truth speak with authority. The people marveled at Christ, who spoke with authority, unlike the Pharisees and the scribes. It is important that we not switch the precedence of truth and authority and make truth a function of authority.
No, not so much. I believe Peter is the rock on which the Church is built because Jesus said it. I believe Jesus because he came from God and is the Son of God. I believe in God because I believe in Existence, I believe in Existence because I am aware of our conversation.

But, honestly, I’m only asserting a circularity based on what has been presented to me thus far. If you can do better, please do. This whole thing started because I was trying to get my head around something anyway.
 
When Irenaeus was alive. There was no such thing as Rome being Supreme:rolleyes: Also i am sure he would have not have liked the Attitude of Rome in 1054 AD
Sure there was. That’s why he was talking about it.

I’ll bet he wouldn’t have a lot of good to say about Michael Cerularius either. The Church became a lot different after it became legal and, later, the state religion.
 
This is not a answear to my Question!! Cant you answer questions?.

I see you putting you points and Questions Across. You get a response and qustions back. But you rarely Respond the same. It seems like debating with a closed minded person.
Let’s stipulate that I’m not only closed-minded, but that I’m a secret Marxist, I wear my underwear on my head in public, and my breath is atrocious. These things don’t make you right and me wrong.

Anyway, I’m sorry, I thought your question was rhetorical. I assume that you meant that the Pope used to enjoy a kind of primacy of honor, a ceremonial primacy where he was a first among equals, and that was subsequently changed into a supremacy where he got to push other people around. I don’t think it happened that way.

Now, do you know the difference between agree and disagree?
 
Well, it’s not just rejection of the Pope, but a certain circularity of reasoning, as I have posted elsewhere.
Yes you did post that elsewhere, and I responded to the accusation. It is a circularity which you have invented. Additionally even if you were given a circular reasoning, that is something people tend to do, and I have seen it from Catholics quite often. Are Catholics therefore also Protestants?
 
JackQ;7658311 said:
I am getting mad, your tone has deteriorated quite rapidly to namecalling (I accuse you of willful ignorence, but I do not believe that you are ignorant enough to not know being called ā€œprotestantā€ would not be well taken). Do I not have a right to be annoyed by that? I have never said the faith is based on tradition and tradition on faith, I said that tradition must be consistant with itself and that IS the faith.

It is quite sad to see some Catholics throw away tradition so easily when it does not agree with them. Let’s see if you can complete that syllogism.
 
I am getting mad, your tone has deteriorated quite rapidly to namecalling (I accuse you of willful ignorence, but I do not believe that you are ignorant enough to not know being called ā€œprotestantā€ would not be well taken). Do I not have a right to be annoyed by that? I have never said the faith is based on tradition and tradition on faith, I said that tradition must be consistant with itself and that IS the faith.

It is quite sad to see some Catholics throw away tradition so easily when it does not agree with them. Let’s see if you can complete that syllogism.
Yeah just the other day on the Apologetics sub-forum a Catholic actually wrote that teaching trumps tradition. I found that statement to be somewhat puzzling.

Of course, it does explain quite a few things…
 
Yeah just the other day on the Apologetics sub-forum a Catholic actually wrote that teaching trumps tradition. I found that statement to be somewhat puzzling.

Of course, it does explain quite a few things…
Sadly I think that’s the mindset that comes out of taking Vatican I to its final conclussion. Tradition loses value when you let one guy become the sole interpreter of it.
 
Sadly I think that’s the mindset that comes out of taking Vatican I to its final conclussion. Tradition loses value when you let one guy become the sole interpreter of it.
I think that this might be a misunderstanding because the Roman Catholic Church claims that its teachings are based upon Tradition and Holy Scripture.
Also, some Catholics tend to believe that many of the differences between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholicism are due not so much to an essential difference in teaching, but more to what may be expressed briefly as a difference between the Latin mindset and the Eastern Orthodox mindset.
But at the same time, my guess is that the Roman Church is going to have to give a whole lot more study to the issue of papal infallibilty and supremacy and what it would mean in a united Church, East and West.
 
Yes you did post that elsewhere, and I responded to the accusation. It is a circularity which you have invented. Additionally even if you were given a circular reasoning, that is something people tend to do, and I have seen it from Catholics quite often. Are Catholics therefore also Protestants?
I don’t know how I could have invented the circularity, since it was based on what the Orthodox posters were saying. But it’s symptomatic of a tendency of some Orthodox posters on these forums to be elusive about the basis for their opinions. And circular reasoning is a characteristic of Protestantism even if a Catholic does it.

But I think what in part caused me to make the Protestant remark, is the disconnect I’ve experienced between Orthodox posters here and in another forum, and Orthodox people I have known. The Orthodox Christians I have known, and it hasn’t been a lot, have all been decent and warm people, with their religion being a part, perhaps the major part, of their Greek or Russian heritage. If I asked about their religious practices, they responded with a deep seated confidence and a disarming humility. Once I even asked if I could come along for the Divine Liturgy. And even though I couldn’t understand the Greek that was being spoken, I remember being touched by the deep piety of my friend’s grandmother and took note of what could only be the Divine presence in her soul lighting up her eyes.

I read Timothy Ware’s book in order to inform myself about Orthodoxy some more. After some consideration of his points, I reached the frank conclusion that I could not understand why he was not a Catholic himself. It was from his book that I learned that the Orthodox accept the historical Petrine nature of the Roman Church, but do not accept what they believe to be the accumulation of more power in the papacy than was originally intended. But I was impressed with the hopeful tone he had in discussing the possibility of the two Churches reuniting. In time, I became very eager that such a reunification would one day take place, for the good of the Church, and for the good of the world to which we are to be a light.

One day I went to an online Orthodox forum and joined as a member. I restricted myself to the forum on Orthodox-Catholic relations. I naively thought that I would discuss reunification between the two Churches with a sympathetic group. Well, let me tell you, I never ran into such a buzzsaw in all my life. There were a large number who not only didn’t want to reunite with the Catholic Church, but positively detested Catholicism, and weren’t ashamed to let me know the fact of it and why. Meanwhile, I was informed that I was to preface anything I said with words like ā€œin my opinionā€ so that no one could mistake what I said for a proclamation, while it was permissible for the Orthodox to hurl any abuse they had a mind to. Finding these operating rules oppressive, I eventually stopped posting there.

Later I found Catholic Answers Forums, and signed up. At that time there was a specific Catholic-Orthodox forum, so I went there to see if my reunification hope would find a more sympathetic audience there. Well, what did my wondering eyes behold, here were the Orthodox engaged in polemics almost as aggressive as what I witnessed on the Orthodox forum. They were calling my Church heterodox, accusing us of seeking domination rather than unity, accusing Catholics of misrepresenting Catholic teaching in order to obtain that sinister unity, calling the Eastern Catholics dupes, saying the Filioque is a heresy, rendering polemical versions of history, and making loud and clear the position that there would be no reunification with the Catholics except by means of conversion to Orthodoxy. Meanwhile they had people who seemed to be able spend all day at the forum, making numerous posts as long as this one, and nearly impossible to keep up with.

With views so intransigent, I had to wonder why they came to a Catholic forum at all. Was it to make converts? Was it to try and show the world the superiority of their religion? I decided that I would no longer emphasize unity with them, but, rather, do the best I could to defend my Catholic faith in my own small way.

Still, I wondered. Why were these Orthodox Christians so different from the ones I knew personally? Then I remembered that certain leaders of Campus Crusade had become Orthodox back in the 1970s forming the Evangelical Orthodox Church. Most of those Churches eventually came under the Antiochian Orthodox Church, with others joining the Orthodox Church of America. It is quite possible, I thought, that these individuals brought their evangelical anti-catholicism with them when they converted and maintained much of the same impetus to witness to the unsaved that was so essential to their evangelical Protestantism. And maybe, I thought, some of that same spirit spread to other Orthodox Christians. Of course, suggestions of reunification would sound ridiculous to those ears. They are proclaiming the truth, the truth that involves the falsity of Catholicism, now with the added confidence that comes from belonging to a Church that goes back to the Apostles. Of course, I have no way of knowing that, but it is sometimes in the back of my mind, and maybe that’s a partial reason I used the ā€œPā€ word. Let me assure you, I’ve gotten worse from the Orthodox.
 
I am getting mad, your tone has deteriorated quite rapidly to namecalling (I accuse you of willful ignorence, but I do not believe that you are ignorant enough to not know being called ā€œprotestantā€ would not be well taken). Do I not have a right to be annoyed by that? I have never said the faith is based on tradition and tradition on faith, I said that tradition must be consistant with itself and that IS the faith.

It is quite sad to see some Catholics throw away tradition so easily when it does not agree with them. Let’s see if you can complete that syllogism.
I don’t think that’s a syllogism.

I really didn’t mean to hurt your feelings. But you guys are quite blunt with us. For example you just accused us of throwing away tradition because it doesn’t agree with us. Now I just take that as part of the argumentation that goes on. Is it fair to expect us to walk on eggshells around you?
 
Hey sidbrown I suppose perspective would be a huge factor for a person. I would have to go with number 1, but I do believe they could still meet half way on certain things. I am reminded of something Pope Benedict XVI said when he went to Cyprus - excerpt from the Pope’s Christmas greeting to the Roman Curia on Monday, the 20th, December 2010:

ā€œAs my second point, I should like to say a word about the Synod of the Churches of the Middle East. This began with my journey to Cyprus, where I was able to consign the Instrumentum Laboris of the Synod to the Bishops of those countries who were assembled there. The hospitality of the Orthodox Church was unforgettable, and we experienced it with great gratitude. Even if full communion is not yet granted to us, we have nevertheless established with joy that the basic form of the ancient Church unites us profoundly with one another: the sacramental office of Bishops as the bearer of apostolic tradition, the reading of Scripture according to the hermeneutic of the Regula fidei, the understanding of Scripture in its manifold unity centred on Christ, developed under divine inspiration, and finally, our faith in the central place of the Eucharist in the Church’s life. Thus we experienced a living encounter with the riches of the rites of the ancient Church that are also found within the Catholic Church. We celebrated the liturgy with Maronites and with Melchites, we celebrated in the Latin rite, we experienced moments of ecumenical prayer with the Orthodox, and we witnessed impressive manifestations of the rich Christian culture of the Christian East. But we also saw the problem of the divided country. The wrongs and the deep wounds of the past were all too evident, but so too was the desire for the peace and communion that had existed before. Everyone knows that violence does not bring progress – indeed, it gave rise to the present situation. Only in a spirit of compromise and mutual understanding can unity be re-established. To prepare the people for this attitude of peace is an essential task of pastoral ministry.ā€
 
I think that this might be a misunderstanding because the Roman Catholic Church claims that its teachings are based upon Tradition and Holy Scripture.
Also, some Catholics tend to believe that many of the differences between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholicism are due not so much to an essential difference in teaching, but more to what may be expressed briefly as a difference between the Latin mindset and the Eastern Orthodox mindset.
But at the same time, my guess is that the Roman Church is going to have to give a whole lot more study to the issue of papal infallibilty and supremacy and what it would mean in a united Church, East and West.
Yeah like it time to give up this foolishness! 😃
 
I think that this might be a misunderstanding because the Roman Catholic Church claims that its teachings are based upon Tradition and Holy Scripture.
Also, some Catholics tend to believe that many of the differences between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholicism are due not so much to an essential difference in teaching, but more to what may be expressed briefly as a difference between the Latin mindset and the Eastern Orthodox mindset.
But at the same time, my guess is that the Roman Church is going to have to give a whole lot more study to the issue of papal infallibilty and supremacy and what it would mean in a united Church, East and West.
Excellent sir! Axios! šŸ™‚

Alex
 
I don’t know how I could have invented the circularity, since it was based on what the Orthodox posters were saying. But it’s symptomatic of a tendency of some Orthodox posters on these forums to be elusive about the basis for their opinions. And circular reasoning is a characteristic of Protestantism even if a Catholic does it.

But I think what in part caused me to make the Protestant remark, is the disconnect I’ve experienced between Orthodox posters here and in another forum, and Orthodox people I have known. The Orthodox Christians I have known, and it hasn’t been a lot, have all been decent and warm people, with their religion being a part, perhaps the major part, of their Greek or Russian heritage. If I asked about their religious practices, they responded with a deep seated confidence and a disarming humility. Once I even asked if I could come along for the Divine Liturgy. And even though I couldn’t understand the Greek that was being spoken, I remember being touched by the deep piety of my friend’s grandmother and took note of what could only be the Divine presence in her soul lighting up her eyes.

I read Timothy Ware’s book in order to inform myself about Orthodoxy some more. After some consideration of his points, I reached the frank conclusion that I could not understand why he was not a Catholic himself. It was from his book that I learned that the Orthodox accept the historical Petrine nature of the Roman Church, but do not accept what they believe to be the accumulation of more power in the papacy than was originally intended. But I was impressed with the hopeful tone he had in discussing the possibility of the two Churches reuniting. In time, I became very eager that such a reunification would one day take place, for the good of the Church, and for the good of the world to which we are to be a light.

One day I went to an online Orthodox forum and joined as a member. I restricted myself to the forum on Orthodox-Catholic relations. I naively thought that I would discuss reunification between the two Churches with a sympathetic group. Well, let me tell you, I never ran into such a buzzsaw in all my life. There were a large number who not only didn’t want to reunite with the Catholic Church, but positively detested Catholicism, and weren’t ashamed to let me know the fact of it and why. Meanwhile, I was informed that I was to preface anything I said with words like ā€œin my opinionā€ so that no one could mistake what I said for a proclamation, while it was permissible for the Orthodox to hurl any abuse they had a mind to. Finding these operating rules oppressive, I eventually stopped posting there.

Later I found Catholic Answers Forums, and signed up. At that time there was a specific Catholic-Orthodox forum, so I went there to see if my reunification hope would find a more sympathetic audience there. Well, what did my wondering eyes behold, here were the Orthodox engaged in polemics almost as aggressive as what I witnessed on the Orthodox forum. They were calling my Church heterodox, accusing us of seeking domination rather than unity, accusing Catholics of misrepresenting Catholic teaching in order to obtain that sinister unity, calling the Eastern Catholics dupes, saying the Filioque is a heresy, rendering polemical versions of history, and making loud and clear the position that there would be no reunification with the Catholics except by means of conversion to Orthodoxy. Meanwhile they had people who seemed to be able spend all day at the forum, making numerous posts as long as this one, and nearly impossible to keep up with.

With views so intransigent, I had to wonder why they came to a Catholic forum at all. Was it to make converts? Was it to try and show the world the superiority of their religion? I decided that I would no longer emphasize unity with them, but, rather, do the best I could to defend my Catholic faith in my own small way.

Still, I wondered. Why were these Orthodox Christians so different from the ones I knew personally? Then I remembered that certain leaders of Campus Crusade had become Orthodox back in the 1970s forming the Evangelical Orthodox Church. Most of those Churches eventually came under the Antiochian Orthodox Church, with others joining the Orthodox Church of America. It is quite possible, I thought, that these individuals brought their evangelical anti-catholicism with them when they converted and maintained much of the same impetus to witness to the unsaved that was so essential to their evangelical Protestantism. And maybe, I thought, some of that same spirit spread to other Orthodox Christians. Of course, suggestions of reunification would sound ridiculous to those ears. They are proclaiming the truth, the truth that involves the falsity of Catholicism, now with the added confidence that comes from belonging to a Church that goes back to the Apostles. Of course, I have no way of knowing that, but it is sometimes in the back of my mind, and maybe that’s a partial reason I used the ā€œPā€ word. Let me assure you, I’ve gotten worse from the Orthodox.
Of course, there are plenty of Catholics, some of whom post here, who are as contemptuous of the Orthodox as these Orthodox you describe here are of Catholics. Why, don’t you know that the Orthodox are evil, heretical, schismatic proto-Protestants who are all doomed to an eternity in hell?
 
All the Churches are unified in the core belief of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and items expressed in the Nicene Creed-(or Apostles Creed or that 3rd one which I can’t spell)all carry outthe work of salvation

Bureacratic Unity between the Orthodox and RC and for that matter the Anglicans and Lutherans (the latter two are in full communion) will have 0 effect on the world so it really does not matter if it happens or not - I have never heard this discussed by regular Catholics-

šŸ˜›
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top