How to pray for Russia?

[Sancte_Iacobus]

"mardukm:

Aside from the papal infallibility, there are no “real and large doctrinal differences.”

Yeah … aside from rejecting the ROCK upon which Christ built the Church upon, everything’s peachy. How can something so fundamental to the true faith be treated so casually?

Aramis:

The damae done by the excess devotion to Fatima is open disdain for brethren the Catholic Church has said share enough of the fullness of the Catholic Faith to be given all sacraments but ordination.

I’m sorry … come again?

In “the past,” where were the prayers for the “conversion” of the Orthodox?

Well to begin with, the Eastern Orthodox Church has been declared to be in schism from Rome. Hence they are schismatics and the Church has always prayed for schismatics privately (through prayers, many of which are even indulgenced) and even publicly (through encyclicals and the holy liturgy itself).

If you’re wanting specific references to the Orthodox Church, here is but one example from a Pope as recent as Pope Pius XI (1923):
Pope Pius XI - Ecclesiam Dei:

We invite most sincerely the Schismatics to join with Us in this unity of the Church, and We desire also that all the faithful, following the teachings and in the footsteps of St. Josaphat, may strive, each according to his ability, to cooperate with Us towards the achievement of this purpose. May all realize, too, that unity is not so much promoted by discussions or by other artificial means, as by the example of a holy life and by good works, especially those dictated by charity towards our Slav brethren and all other Easterners. This, too, is the thought of the Apostle St. Paul when he writes: “Be of one mind, having the same charity, being of one accord, agreeing in sentiment. Let nothing be done through contention, neither by vain glory; but in humility, let each esteem others better than themselves: each one not considering the things that are his own, but those that are other men’s,” (Philippians ii, 2, 4).

1. To achieve this end, as it is necessary on the one hand for the Schismatic Easterners to lay aside their ancient prejudices and to seek really to know the true life of the Church, not attributing to the Roman Church the faults of mere individuals, faults which she is the first to condemn and seeks as well to correct; so the Latins, on their side, must strive to understand better and more profoundly the history and customs of the Easterners. It was because of an intimate knowledge of these facts that the apostolate of St. Josaphat turned out so successful.

As the Holy Father stated, understanding is certainly needed but, unlike some commentators on this thread, *"understanding" is not an end in and of itself. * Once you have that proper understanding then what are you to do with it? You are to use it to touch the hearts of all who have separated themselves from the sole ark of salvation and bring them back into the fold.

mardukm:

No. Because when she spoke of the conversion of Russia, she meant from communism, not Orthodoxy.

She spoke of conversion indeed, but convert to what? You’ve given your opinion as to what they should convert from (i.e. communism) … but what should they convert to? The Russian Orthodox Church whose Moscow Patriarchate was practically a subsidiary with the KGB … ? Besides, even if you believe that our Lady was speaking solely about converting from Communism (which has been somewhat accomplished) do you believe Russia is now a nation that has confirmed our Lady’s desires? Russia’s abortion rate is 60% of all pregnancies, it is overrun by organized crime, drugs, prostitution, sex slavery … does this sound like a converted nation to me … or did our Lady perhaps mean something a bit more?

Our Holy Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary, seeks the propagation of the one, true faith that her Son sacrificed His life for and a Church that has broken away from that one, mystical body is not it. Is this somehow “intolerant” or “uncharitable”? No, it is the truth … the truth that Holy Mother Church has taught and defined for centuries regardless of some find it “embarrassing”.

In Corde Regis,
Joshua

 

[Aramis]

The damae done by the excess devotion to Fatima is open disdain for brethren the Catholic Church has said share enough of the fullness of the Catholic Faith to be given all sacraments but ordination.

I’m sorry … come again?

Go read canon 844 of the CIC. That’s Roman Canon Law, in case you are unaware.

Here’s the text:
Can. 844 §1. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone, without prejudice to the prescripts of §§2, 3, and 4 of this canon, and ⇒ can. 861, §2.

§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.

§3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.

§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.

§5. For the cases mentioned in §§2, 3, and 4, the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops is not to issue general norms except after consultation at least with the local competent authority of the interested non-Catholic Church or community.

as presented at vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2T.HTM
(That’s the Vatican Web Site, for your reference.)

Further, in the case of the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Syrian Orthodox Church, formal intercommunion exists by treaties with the Catholic Church.

 

[Sancte_Iacobus]

Go read canon 844 of the CIC. That’s Roman Canon Law, in case you are unaware.

I simply asked that question because I initially did not understand your sentence from a grammatical perspective.

Regardless, I fail to see how your Canon Law citations are relevant to this discussion in any way … in particular, how they pertain to devotion to Our Lady of Fatima … What they simply state are the rare cases where the Church allows its members to partake of the valid Sacraments of Churches in schism (and vice-versa) in extraordinary or dire circumstances … we are aware of this, Aramis. Thanks.

Now, correct me if I’m wrong … but are you stating that you, as a Catholic, are ***embarrassed ***by other Catholics professing devotion to the Church approved Marian apparition of Fatima … because it may offend schismatics? You also say that the more you “look into” Our Lady of Fatima apparition the more you “don’t like it”.

Now, yes, you are correct to say that the Church does not bind its members to believe in these apparitions, but they have been formally approved by the Church as genuine and if you (or anyone) believes they are false (or even "damaging" as you say) than the burden of proof is on you to show why the Church was wrong in approving them.

In Corde Regis,
Joshua

 

[Albizzi]

I simply asked that question because I initially did not understand your sentence from a grammatical perspective.

Regardless, I fail to see how your Canon Law citations are relevant to this discussion in any way … in particular, how they pertain to devotion to Our Lady of Fatima … What they simply state are the rare cases where the Church allows its members to partake of the valid Sacraments of Churches in schism (and vice-versa) in extraordinary or dire circumstances … we are aware of this, Aramis. Thanks.

Now, correct me if I’m wrong … but are you stating that you, as a Catholic, are ***embarrassed ***by other Catholics professing devotion to the Church approved Marian apparition of Fatima … because it may offend schismatics? You also say that the more you “look into” Our Lady of Fatima apparition the more you “don’t like it”.

Now, yes, you are correct to say that the Church does not bind its members to believe in these apparitions, but they have been formally approved by the Church as genuine and if you (or anyone) believes they are false (or even "damaging" as you say) than the burden of proof is on you to show why the Church was wrong in approving them.

In Corde Regis,
Joshua

Very good, Sancte Jacobus.
I wouldn’t have said it better.
There always had been a problem between Fatima and the libero-modernists of the RCC. They don’t like it because it goes against their minds and their agenda.
Due to the Miracle of the sun, these apparations and upon all the messages given by the Virgin are inescapable.
Every sunday at mass we are given large excerpts of the Old Testament prophets, but the prophets of the times being are largely ignored under the false pretext they are “private revelation”.
Weren’t the messages given to Isaiah, Daniel, Jeremiah, Zechariah, etc… “private revelations” too?
Anyway, like Israel 3000 years ago, the people of God (the RCC of 2009) remains deaf to the warnings of Heavens.

 

[malphono]

The Holy Catholic Church has approved the apparitions of Fatima as genuine and worthy of belief. Tell me, Aramis … what exhaustive research have you done to deem Our Lady of Fatima as “embarrassing”? The fact that you find an approved apparition of our Lady embarrassing simply because it poses problems to your ecu-mania is truly embarrassing to me as a fellow Catholic.

As Aramis said earlier, approval does not mean the apparitions are part of the deposit of faith. They aren’t.

Well to begin with, the Eastern Orthodox Church has been declared to be in schism from Rome. Hence they are schismatics and the Church has always prayed for schismatics privately (through prayers, many of which are even indulgenced) and even publicly (through encyclicals and the holy liturgy itself).

If you’re wanting specific references to the Orthodox Church, here is but one example from a Pope as recent as Pope Pius XI (1923):

As the Holy Father stated, understanding is certainly needed but, unlike some commentators on this thread, "understanding" is not an end in and of itself. Once you have that proper understanding then what are you to do with it? You are to use it to touch the hearts of all who have separated themselves from the sole ark of salvation and bring them back into the fold.

The quote from PP Pius XI (of blessed memory) is lovely. Notice, in particular that he does not speak to conversion at all, but rather to mutual understanding. In other words, understanding from both sides. The prayer is for that mutual understanding in order to heal the schism. It’s not for conversion.

 

[Sancte_Iacobus]

As Aramis said earlier, approval does not mean the apparitions are part of the deposit of faith. They aren’t.

… and as I said earlier, you are correct to say that the Church does not bind its members to believe in these apparitions, but they have been formally approved by the Church as genuine and if you (or anyone) believes they are false (or even “damaging” as you say) than the burden of proof is on you to show why the Church was wrong in approving them.

The quote from PP Pius XI (of blessed memory) is lovely. Notice, in particular that he does not speak to conversion at all …

Perhaps this should suffice.

Here is Pope Benedict XIV in addressing Missionaries to convert the Orthodox in the Orient:
Pope Benedict XIV - Allatae Sunt:

In the first place this [the Orthodox rejection of Protestant heresies] gives substantial hope that when they are confronted with the teaching of the Fathers, which strongly supports our Catholic doctrine and attacks their own more recent errors, they will be inspired to a genuine conversion and find it very easy to return.

Here is again Pope Pius IX in an encyclical addressing the history of the Armenian Catholic Church who were initially under the reign of an Oriental Orthodox Patriarch:
Pope Pius IX - Quartus Supra:

For instance, when the Catholics were protecting themselves against the strong power of the schismatics to whom they were subjected, they asked for a different patriarch for themselves. By this fact they ensured their separation from these schismatics and their true and sincere conversion to the Catholic faith as indeed happened when Abraham Peter I was elected [in 1740].

In Corde Regis,
Joshua

 

[malphono]

… and as I said earlier, you are correct to say that the Church does not bind its members to believe in these apparitions, but they have been formally approved by the Church as genuine and if you (or anyone) believes they are false (or even “damaging” as you say) than the burden of proof is on you to show why the Church was wrong in approving them.

Hold on there … I simply reiterated a comment made by another poster with which I happen to agree: To repeat: “approval does not mean the apparitions are part of the deposit of faith.” I never used the word “damaging” or anything of the sort, so please do not put words in my mouth.

Perhaps this should suffice.

Here is Pope Benedict XIV in addressing Missionaries to convert the Orthodox in the Orient:

Here is again Pope Pius IX in an encyclical addressing the history of the Armenian Catholic Church who were initially under the reign of an Oriental Orthodox Patriarch:

More very nice quotes, and its more of the same. The use of the word “conversion” in Allatae Sunt clearly speaks to a conversion of heart rather than a “conversion” of faith. I won’t address Pius IX except to say the situation referred to was more political than it was anything else.

In any case, this exchange is going nowhere. We are clearly on a merry-go-round here and I’m hopping off.

 

[Sancte_Iacobus]

Hold on there … I simply reiterated a comment made by another poster with which I happen to agree: To repeat: “approval does not mean the apparitions are part of the deposit of faith.” I never used the word “damaging” or anything of the sort, so please do not put words in my mouth.

Sorry, the *“you” *in my last post was referring to Aramis, not you, as I simply copied and pasted my previous post.

More very nice quotes, and its more of the same. The use of the word “conversion” in Allatae Sunt clearly speaks to a conversion of heart rather than a “conversion” of faith. I won’t address Pius IX except to say the situation referred to was more political than it was anything else.

Incredible. Absolutely incredible.

If Mental Gymnastics were an Olympic Sport you’d take the gold. Pius IX’s glorious retelling of the Armenian Catholics coming back into the fold of Peter is “political” ? … Pope Benedict XIV’s words are only for a “conversion of the heart”? It was written for Missionaries located in the Orient whose sole purpose was to convert the Easten Orthodox to Catholicism!

… Can’t you see yourself? Do you even have a sliver of a basis for your outrageous interpretations?

You take such clear evidence and warp it completely out of its own intent to suit your agenda and insert your own rhetoric and post-modern vocabulary into the mouths of Popes.

Even when faced with such clear and emphatic quotes from our Holy Fathers of time immemorial … you simply cannot manage to have yourself admit that you have erred. You’re right, this discussion is going absolutely nowhere as you, and many others, simply cannot allow your agendas to conform to the truth, and the more and more I attempt to bring to light more and more objective evidence … the more and more I realize I am simply talking to walls.

In Corde Regis,
Joshua

 

[Catherine_Grant]

Note from Moderator:

Members are free to discuss, dialogue, question, disagree with, and debate the liturgy, theology, spirituality, discipline, culture, and history of Eastern, Oriental, and Western Catholicism. However, all discourse must be civil and charitable.This thread is now closed. Thank you to all who charitably participated.