Heart is pulling me towards Orthodoxy

[AlNg]

It was in fake bull delivered by Cardinal Humbert

No, I don’t see it there. Show us or quote the statement in the papal bull of 1054 where it says that Patriarch Michael Cerularius trampled on the Eucharist. Otherwise, this is more slander and false allegations from you. Yes, you are continuing in your campaign of defamation and slander against an innocent man and you have nothing to back it up.
The papal bull that I have read says that Constantine trampled the sacrifice of the Latins with profane feet; but it makes no mention of your allegation that this was ever done by Patriarch Michael Cerularius.

 

[Erik]

Origen (born in the 2nd Century) reported that the Greek writer, Phlegon, was aware of Jesus’ prophetic power [and viewed saint Peter in highly exalted terms]:

“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events (although falling into confusion about some things which refer to Peter, as if they referred to Jesus), but also testified that the result corresponded to his predictions.” (Origen, “Origen Against Celsus,”)

 

[Saint_Prince_Caspian]

I think people must be missing something more important than that. For all the Greco Icons of Our Lady. When She asked for the Conversion of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. And even Her Apparition in Fatima Portugal. Has the Orthodox Church observed these? I think not.

Our Lady has found the Bride of Christ befitting to marry Her Son. Not the Orthodox, Protestant, or other beliefs or church’s. Not one has listened to Her. But the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. One Bride, One Princess. Not the Orthodox Church.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Oh, appears I’ve missread that. Apologies. Still, Patriarch Michael forbid Latin customs and did not denounce man who stepped on Eucharist, became involved in installing Emperors and wanted to be crowned as one, wore shoes only for Emperors and was hence proven to be quite powerhungry man. I would not call him innocent. Ignoring Papal Legates was as wrong as presenting false excommunication. He died accused of heresy and in exile.

But I apologize for my missinformation.

 

[ziapueblo]

Still, Patriarch Michael forbid Latin customs

According to a Catholic Answers tract it was the Catholic Normans who conquered Italy and in the Greek colonies of southern Italy, “they compelled the Greek communities there to adopt the Latin-Rite custom of using unleavened bread for the Eucharist.” Patriarch Michaels response was to force Latin rite Catholics to use leavened bread.

This is a long thread so you may have already mentioned this and I overlooked it.

ZP

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

According to a Catholic Answers tract it was the Catholic Normans who conquered Italy and in the Greek colonies of southern Italy, “they compelled the Greek communities there to adopt the Latin-Rite custom of using unleavened bread for the Eucharist.” Patriarch Michaels response was to force Latin rite Catholics to use leavened bread.

This is a long thread so you may have already mentioned this and I overlooked it.

Might have been the case, but I meant closing Latin Churches in Constantinople. Patriarch Michael belonged to anti-Roman party and when he got elected, he forbid use of unleavened bread in his territories (as well as saying Filioque), and one of his followers stepped on Eucharist which prompted Pope to send his Legates. Patriarch however did not receive them and ignored them, few actions of short-tempered men later and boom, schism.

 

[ziapueblo]

Just something from a Catholic Answers tract back when I was heavy into Roman Catholic apologetics:

Eastern Orthodoxy | Catholic Answers Tract

ZP

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I find that article to be very well-written, as while it has strong emphasis on hope for unity, it also clearly states what differences need to be resolved. Thank you for that.

I was not aware of Normans forbidding leavened bread either, how unfortunate outcome of events. At one point, Emperor wanted to depose Patriarch Michael and conform with “Papal demands” (in-fact invalid and fake demands), but issue resolved differently. I also find dating schism to fall of Constantinople a bit misleading, because then Council of Florence had no schism to solve and that surely was not the case- I’d just say it was around Sack of Constantinople when Schism really escalated.

 

[Isaac14]

I think people must be missing something more important than that. For all the Greco Icons of Our Lady. When She asked for the Conversion of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. And even Her Apparition in Fatima Portugal. Has the Orthodox Church observed these? I think not.

Our Lady has found the Bride of Christ befitting to marry Her Son. Not the Orthodox, Protestant, or other beliefs or church’s. Not one has listened to Her. But the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. One Bride, One Princess. Not the Orthodox Church.

I apologize for not understanding, but what are you trying to say here?

 

[Kyparissiotes]

This would be the heresy of ecumenism which denies the scripture- “One Lord, One Faith, One baptism.”

Not many.

 

[ziapueblo]

This would be the heresy of ecumenism which denies the scripture- “One Lord, One Faith, One baptism.”

Isn’t this how the Catholic Church operates? I’m Byzantine Catholic. We’re not Roman Catholics with a differently Liturgy. We have our own liturgical tradition, theology, spiritual and prayer life yet we are in communion with Rome.

ZP

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

No She does not, difference in interpretation, liturgy and devotions are not differences in truth or authority. Church is still One.

 

[ziapueblo]

No She does not, difference in interpretation, liturgy and devotions are not differences in truth or authority. Church is still One.

I never said we were not one. I’m saying we are not Roman Catholics. We are in communion despite our diversity in sharing the same faith.

However, we are different, and not only in the way that we express our faith. For example, two Sundays ago, second Sunday of Great and Holy Lent, we celebrated Saint Gregory Palamas. It is on the Byzantine CATHOLIC calendar, whether Roman Catholics like it or not. Many of us venerate, wait for it, Saints like Mark of Ephesus and Alexis Toth too. I’m going to get scolded for this I’m sure

ZP

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Many of us venerate, wait for it, Saints like Mark of Ephesus and Alexis Toth too. I’m going to get scolded for this I’m sure

You seem to want to get scolded, to laugh at us who take things too seriously etc. What do you venerate those men for even? I guess that’s your private concern, but then again you did bring it up here so like brother in Christ I’d like to correct you- you seem to view East as united with “upper management issues” and practically reduce Latin Church to be in formal unity, while being disunited. Whether that is how you phrase it or not, you are essentially provoking split between Catholics while embracing Orthodoxy, something I can never agree with.

For example, two Sundays ago, second Sunday of Great and Holy Lent, we celebrated Saint Gregory Palamas. It is on the Byzantine CATHOLIC calendar, whether Roman Catholics like it or not.

Sure it is, unlike those you listed above, Gregory is not venerated for opposing Church.

You did respond to accusation of indifferentism and ecumenism as heresies, saying :

Isn’t this how the Catholic Church operates?

and I had to answer no, because accusing Church of Christ of heresy is a whole new level. Bet if someone accused you of apostaty for, say, thinking Alexis Toth deserves veneration for leaving Church and bringing a lot of people outside of full communion with Bride of Christ, you would be offended or laugh in defense about how Latins always denounce East- yet we do not denounce East more we blame West; as we denounced Lutherans and Calvinists for heresies, and as we accused sedevacantists of Schism and tried to correct SSPX’s ways of disobedience towards Rome, we will do the same with our Eastern brothers- not because we feel superior, but because we expect same of you, to correct us when it is needed. When Paul corrected Peter, lower authority corrected higher authority. When Apostles corrected Jewish Christians enforcing circumcision, higher authority corrected lower authority. Hence, correcting is not about authority but about fraternal charity.

Opinion East should mind Eastern things and West should mind Western things is clearly not a right one in Universal Church.

 

[Babaganoush]

I disagree. I have been in the same position as the op, and the thing about pre Vatican II is that they respected tradition. So the traditional Catholics and the Orthodox have common ground, even if there are some big differences. And I think the respect for the tradition is a bigger deal than most of the differences. Most traditionalists are so because they perceive a lack of continuity air a disregard for the faith that was handed down. I don’t attend the Latin mass and would rather not, but I do see a lack of continuity in the current church. So even though there is a lot more charity in the current approach to the eastern churches from the Catholic Church, I do think that there is a lot less common ground because there is a different approach to what has been handed down to us.

 

[Babaganoush]

The question is, when do you assume the ship has sunk and abandon ship. I believe loyalty or faithfulness is very important. You don’t just jump ship when things look bad, but there reaches a point where you have to ask the question ‘is it the same church it was and does it really believe the same thing as it did’. I can’t bury my head and pretend everything is the same and all is alright. Continuity of belief is very important. If the Catholic Church has changed then their arguments against the Orthodox also become suspect. Or are we to be faithful to something that really doesn’t exist beyond our own minds and those of a very small minority that is not in line with any of the hierarchy?

 

[ziapueblo]

What do you venerate those men for even?

Why not?

http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showr...thodox&pgnu=1&groupnum=7&record_bookmark=1761

You seem to want to get scolded, to laugh at us who take things too seriously etc.

I just want to show that we share the same faith despite differences.

Whether that is how you phrase it or not, you are essentially provoking split between Catholics while embracing Orthodoxy, something I can never agree with.

I’m not provoking a split between Catholics. I see many Eastern Catholics on this forum speak of the differences in Liturgy, theology, etc. but never have I seen an Eastern Catholic tear down a Latin private devotion or theological expression. I have seen some, not most and not all, but some Roman Catholics who seem to “put me in my place”, you could say, because I express my faith in a way that is not Latin.

Never have a argued against communion with Rome. It is important. That is why I am in communion with the See of Rome!

ZP

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I have seen some , not most and not all, but some Roman Catholics who seem to “put me in my place”, you could say, because I express my faith in a way that is not Latin.

That’s playing a victim, while your faith’s expression is not Latin, it is Catholic. It is fully authentic and it is as Eastern Catholic Churches were pre-schism. Orthodoxy took that expression of faith as their own- but that does not make you Orthodox.

Why not?

That’s what matters- reason. I would argue that Alexis Toth wanted to be Eastern more than Catholic, so he left Church and died outside of it’s communion and brought many souls with him. It would be akin to SSPX in West. If you venerate him and take example from good things he has done, and sincerely believe he is now in Catholic Church as all Saints are, it’s alright but if you venerate him because it’s Eastern and because he upheld tradition instead of remaining loyal to Church, I would not advise it.

never have I seen an Eastern Catholic tear down a Latin private devotion or theological expression

Because we are majority, but in the end people question Latins a lot too, it’s just pressure outside of Church. I would be up for more education concerning Eastern Churches and Latin Churches. I still do not agree with ecclesiology some people present as “Eastern”, while it’s just “Orthodox”- Catholic ecclesiology (primacy of Pope, infallibility of Pope, Papal Supreme Jurisdiction) is both Eastern and Western. That is issue I have with some Eastern Catholics, who do not acknowledge that or seem to deny those dogmas.

 

[Babaganoush]

The union of Brest specifically condemned forcing easterners to become western. They agreed that the eastern Christians could remain as they were. But apparently Alexis Roth and other eastern Catholics weren’t deemed catholic enough. Why should they remain within a union that the west had gone back on? They should have become western because the west didn’t approve? I could say you are more concerned with us easterners being in full agreement with the west more than whether we are faithful to the tradition that was handed on. We should subject ourselves to the west even if it means the destruction of our tradition.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Jewish converts to Christianity tried to enforce circumcision to apply for everyone, but as Council corrected them they had to submit to authority instead of upholding tradition- it was less important than their tradition. Not saying Eastern tradition ever got condemned, but obedience to Church and trusting that God will correct it was more important. Padre Pio was forbidden to celebrate Mass and yet he remained faithful to Church, even though authorities were wrong in his case. Trust in God’s Supreme Providence.

I’m not saying Alexis Toth’s case was easy, but he did not act perfectly. There were people who got condemned for upholding traditional Catholic masses and values, but they decided not to leave Church with (semi-)schismatic group of SSPX, but remained faithful to it. Tradition < communion with Church of Christ.

I would subject myself to East instead of losing communion with Church. I might not be way too bound to anything yet, I agree, but while it was hard for people to leave their families and join Our Lord, it was right thing to do. When Council of Trent changed many liturgical forms into Tridentine Mass, many rites of Church were “lost” but it was not as important for people to uphold them as remaining faithful to Peter’s See. I wonder what would happen if Alexis Toth remained faithful to Christ and His Church, as St. Ignatius said, people do not know what God will do to them when they give themselves to Him. Perhaps Eastern Catholics would be much more widespread. Of course, same could be said about scenario where Archbishop Ireland respected tradition of Church- it’s Eastern part.