I was open to Orthodoxy but...

[jmcrae]

Thats very easy to say…but look at the history of the parts of the world where these churches come from…first under the domination of Islam…then Soviet communism…hardly the environment for evangelization!! These Churches are lucky to be alive!! I wonder where the RCC would be if it had to deal with the persecution the Orthodox suffered under for the better part of the last 1000 years?

Uh - Catholics have had to deal with crucifixion, being eaten by lions, and all that sort of thing in early history, in addition to various forms of Communism, Islam, and Protestantism at various points in middle and recent history, as well. We still managed to be present in every community in the known world …

 

[ConstantineTG]

Uh - Catholics have had to deal with crucifixion, being eaten by lions, and all that sort of thing in early history, in addition to various forms of Communism, Islam, and Protestantism at various points in middle and recent history, as well. We still managed to be present in every community in the known world …

Wait, those happened in early Christian history. The Orthodox has as much claim to that as the Catholics. We were one Church back then.

 

[ciero]

Uh - Catholics have had to deal with crucifixion, being eaten by lions, and all that sort of thing in early history, in addition to various forms of Communism, Islam, and Protestantism at various points in middle and recent history, as well. We still managed to be present in every community in the known world …

The early persecutions you speak about were from the time of the undivided church…Orthodox claim these same martyrs…and the later instances you mention do not come close to what the Orthodox had to deal with…show me one place where the RCC was dominated by Islam for over 800 years…or by Soviet communism…the RCC dosen’t come close.

And where was Rome when it came time to defend our fellow Christians? The Byzantine empire begged the Pope for assistance that he promised and it never came…

 

[jmcrae]

The early persecutions you speak about were from the time of the undivided church…Orthodox claim these same martyrs…and the later instances you mention do not come close to what the Orthodox had to deal with…show me one place where the RCC was dominated by Islam for over 800 years…or by Soviet communism…the RCC dosen’t come close.

And where was Rome when it came time to defend our fellow Christians? The Byzantine empire begged the Pope for assistance that he promised and it never came…

Spain was dominated by Islam for 700 years, so yes, it does come close, actually. That was why there was a Spanish Inquisition - it had nothing to do with Protestantism, although certainly there were Lutherans looting and attacking the Vatican itself for some period of decades. It has not all been roses and sunshine, although we do fight back, and usually, we win - we in the West don’t play the victim very well, or at least not for very long - our attackers find that out quick enough, and then they go home.

Don’t know what happened with the Byzantine Empire; the Pope should have kept his promise, if he made one. But one man’s sin doesn’t make the whole Church invalid.

 

[ciero]

Spain was dominated by Islam for 700 years, so yes, it does come close, actually. That was why there was a Spanish Inquisition - it had nothing to do with Protestantism, although certainly there were Lutherans looting and attacking the Vatican itself for some period of decades. It has not all been roses and sunshine, although we do fight back, and usually, we win - we in the West don’t play the victim very well, or at least not for very long - our attackers find that out quick enough, and then they go home.

Don’t know what happened with the Byzantine Empire; the Pope should have kept his promise, if he made one. But one man’s sin doesn’t make the whole Church invalid.

I don’t believe anyone here said that the Popes sin made the church invalid…and if your idea of Christianity is fighting back and might is right…I don’t think I want anything to do with it…Constantinople here I come!!

 

[Ken_Taki]

I still find Roman Catholicism nationalistic. There are many wonderful local traditions where Roman Catholicism is. The issue is when these ethnic traditions clash. The problem I think most traditionalists have with Roman Catholicism today is the strong influence of incultured Roman Catholicism coming in from other areas. In the US for example, as the population of Caucasian European-decent RCs go down, they are replaced by Hispanics (include Filipinos who’s Catholic identity came from Spain). Now these people would complain of things that are new to them, therefore blame it as modern innovation, but has been part of the other cultures for decades, if not centuries.

You find Roman Catholicism nationalistic??? As compared to Orthodoxy?!?!?!?

WHAT?!?!?!?

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t believe anyone here said that the Popes sin made the church invalid…and if your idea of Christianity is fighting back and might is right…I don’t think I want anything to do with it…Constantinople here I come!!

I never said that - I just said when we are under attack we don’t whine and wallow in self-pity - we defend ourselves. Doesn’t make us “right” - or “wrong,” either. Just not whiny, and not making our problems to be the reason we are famous.

 

[Rawb]

Wouldn’t you say Christos Anesti as well? I thought all Byzantine Churches would say it in Greek on top of other languages (Slavonic, Arabic, vernaculars).

At my parish we said it in Slavonic, Serbian, Russian and English (oh, and Latin). At the Greek parish here they said it in Greek, English, Slavonic, and some African Dialects (Father Jim makes sure to say it in every language of any immigrant at his parish).

If someone said “Christos Anesti” to me I would respond in Greek, yes. Is that what you’re asking? By “Byzantine” do you mean Greek? “Byzantine” to us often is exchangeable with “Eastern”, so while Eastern Orthodox consider ourselves Byzantine we don’t all consider ourselves Greek.

 

[Rawb]

You find Roman Catholicism nationalistic??? As compared to Orthodoxy?!?!?!?

WHAT?!?!?!?

That was his experience.

Don’t undermine someones emotional experience saying its invalid or irrelevant.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You find Roman Catholicism nationalistic??? As compared to Orthodoxy?!?!?!?

WHAT?!?!?!?

Yes. As I have explained many cultures have added their cultural distinctiveness to the practice of the faith.

 

[ConstantineTG]

That was his experience.

Don’t undermine someones emotional experience saying its invalid or irrelevant.

Thanks. I’m pretty sure people here would be in shock when they go to the Philippines and see how Roman Catholicism is practiced there. While the Mass is the same, almost every other aspect is different.

 

[jmcrae]

Thanks. I’m pretty sure people here would be in shock when they go to the Philippines and see how Roman Catholicism is practiced there. While the Mass is the same, almost every other aspect is different.

It’s still the Catholic Church in full communion with the Pope, though.

The nationalism of Orthodoxy is that they are physically unable to have the same Patriarch over all of the Orthodox Churches. They say they are the same faith, but each one answers to a different Patriarch - a Patriarch of the same race and nationality as themselves.

in our case, all of us answer to the same Pope - his nationality (and ours) is not important.

 

[Rawb]

It’s still the Catholic Church in full communion with the Pope, though.

The nationalism of Orthodoxy is that they are physically unable to have the same Patriarch over all of the Orthodox Churches. They say they are the same faith, but each one answers to a different Patriarch - a Patriarch of the same race and nationality as themselves.

in our case, all of us answer to the same Pope - his nationality (and ours) is not important.

No Orthodox answers to any Patriarch unless that Patriarch happens to be their bishop. The Patriarchs have no authority over other bishops - only the Local Synod has authority over bishops.

And I’m a descendant of Prussian Jews who’s bishop is Serbian, so clearly I don’t answer to anyone “of the same nationality as myself”.

We all answer to Christ.

 

[ConstantineTG]

It’s still the Catholic Church in full communion with the Pope, though.

The nationalism of Orthodoxy is that they are physically unable to have the same Patriarch over all of the Orthodox Churches. They say they are the same faith, but each one answers to a different Patriarch - a Patriarch of the same race and nationality as themselves.

in our case, all of us answer to the same Pope - his nationality (and ours) is not important.

This is a bit ignorant of Catholic history. Italians have dominated the Papacy. Its only today because of modern technology that Bishops of other nationalities get the attention and are then elected Pope. In fact, from Clement VII in 1523 to John Paul I, all have been Italian Popes.

 

[ciero]

It’s still the Catholic Church in full communion with the Pope, though.

The nationalism of Orthodoxy is that they are physically unable to have the same Patriarch over all of the Orthodox Churches. They say they are the same faith, but each one answers to a different Patriarch - a Patriarch of the same race and nationality as themselves.

in our case, all of us answer to the same Pope - his nationality (and ours) is not important.

Your problem is you want the whole world to view the church as you do! Even Rome does not insist on this view…pull your head out of the sand !!

This view of the church is VERY new…even in the West!

 

[GaryTaylor]

No Orthodox answers to any Patriarch unless that Patriarch happens to be their bishop. The Patriarchs have no authority over other bishops - only the Local Synod has authority over bishops.

And I’m a descendant of Prussian Jews who’s bishop is Serbian, so clearly I don’t answer to anyone “of the same nationality as myself”.

We all answer to Christ.

The Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople is “first” in honour among all the Eastern Orthodox bishops, presides in person - or through a delegate - “over any council of Orthodox primates and/or bishops” in which he takes part and serves as “primary spokesman for the Orthodox communion”, especially in ecumenical contacts with other Christian denominations. He has no direct jurisdiction over the other patriarchs or the other autocephalous Orthodox churches, but he, alone among his fellow-primates, enjoys the right of convening extraordinary synods consisting of them and/or their delegates to deal with ad hoc situations and has also convened well-attended Pan-Orthodox Synods in the last forty years.

In addition to being the “spiritual leader of 300 million Orthodox Christians worldwide”, he is the direct administrative superior of dioceses and archdioceses serving millions of Greek, Ukrainian, Rusyn and Albanian believers in North and South America, Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand, Hong Kong, Korea, Southeast Asia and parts of modern Greece which, for historical reasons, do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Church of Greece.

I do believe you are basically wrong in your understanding above as the wikepedia article states. When I have time I’ll search for others I want to link, more up to date directly from the EO.

Sorry I been busy and haven’t had much time for internet chat. But when I have time I will give you latest info on Constantinople which as I type is trying to establish jurisdiction. Matter fact I came across a few articles on it last we talked Rawb. Wasn’t related to the conversation so I didn’t link it. But the info “is” out here. Of course most of the Orthodox world rejects this, but nonetheless this “perfect pattern” which seems to be projected? It doesn’t exist!

God Bless, Gary

 

[Cavaradossi]

It’s still the Catholic Church in full communion with the Pope, though.

The nationalism of Orthodoxy is that they are physically unable to have the same Patriarch over all of the Orthodox Churches. They say they are the same faith, but each one answers to a different Patriarch - a Patriarch of the same race and nationality as themselves.

in our case, all of us answer to the same Pope - his nationality (and ours) is not important.

So you say that the nationality of the Pope doesn’t matter, but the Patriarch’s does? That’s quite a double standard. When one Eastern Orthodox Christian goes to another Eastern Orthodox church throughout the world, he would be able to take Communion freely no matter what Eastern Orthodox church he’s visiting because we are all united under one faith. Yes, there are slight differences in the customs of local churches, but the basic faith remains the same. We firmly believe that there is no need for one unified leader for us to answer to because our view of authority is different from the Roman Catholic view. Authority for us comes from the unity of the Church in faith.

Authority is not given only to Patriarchs; authority is given to all bishops who then hold synods when major points of disagreement come about in their patriarchate or archdiocese. If a major conflict comes across the whole church, then we hold an ecumenical council. There has not been a conflict widespread enough in Orthodoxy to warrant calling an ecumenical council for nearly 1200 years (since the iconoclasm), only synods to deal with local problems (rarely, some particularly good synods have gained unofficial Churchwide recognition even though they technically do not have the authority of an ecumenical council). There is no “Patriarch to answer to.” We are directly under the authority of our local bishop who who himself is under authority of the decisions of ecumenical councils and local synods (in other words, all bishops have authority and vote in making decisions, but they are also under the authority of the entire body of bishops). While it might seem scary not having one person of definitive authority at the head of things, I assure you that this system has worked rather well for the past 1978 years of the Church, and it is one that has preserved the deposit of the faith left to us by the Church Fathers through the generations.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Your problem is you want the whole world to view the church as you do! Even Rome does not insist on this view…pull your head out of the sand !!

This view of the church is VERY new…even in the West!

Please explain how you believe it does work then.

The “Your Problem” statements would place you in the CAF Therapist Catagory. Have you been officially given this title?

God Bless, Gary

 

[GaryTaylor]

So you say that the nationality of the Pope doesn’t matter, but the Patriarch’s does? That’s quite a double standard. When one Eastern Orthodox Christian goes to another Eastern Orthodox church throughout the world, he would be able to take Communion freely no matter what Eastern Orthodox church he’s visiting because we are all united under one faith. Yes, there are slight differences in the customs of local churches, but the basic faith remains the same. We firmly believe that there is no need for one unified leader for us to answer to because our view of authority is different from the Roman Catholic view. Authority for us comes from the unity of the Church in faith.

Authority is not given only to Patriarchs; authority is given to all bishops who then hold synods when major points of disagreement come about in their patriarchate or archdiocese. If a major conflict comes across the whole church, then we hold an ecumenical council. There has not been a conflict widespread enough in Orthodoxy to warrant calling an ecumenical council for nearly 1200 years (since the iconoclasm), only synods to deal with local problems (rarely, some particularly good synods have gained unofficial Churchwide recognition even though they technically do not have the authority of an ecumenical council). There is no “Patriarch to answer to.” We are directly under the authority of our local bishop who who himself is under authority of the decisions of ecumenical councils and local synods (in other words, all bishops have authority and vote in making decisions, but they are also under the authority of the entire body of bishops). While it might seem scary not having one person of definitive authority at the head of things, I assure you that this system has worked rather well for the past 1978 years of the Church, and it is one that has preserved the deposit of the faith left to us by the Church Fathers through the generations.

Doesn’t seem to be in context with what Wikepedia is stating above?

Here I’ll re-print it…

“He is the direct administrative “superior” of dioceses and archdioceses serving millions of Greek, Ukrainian, Rusyn and Albanian believers in North and South America, Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand, Hong Kong, Korea, Southeast Asia and parts of modern Greece which, for historical reasons, do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Church of Greece.”

 

[GaryTaylor]

Italians have dominated the Papacy. Its only today because of modern technology that Bishops of other nationalities get the attention and are then elected Pope. In fact, from Clement VII in 1523 to John Paul I, all have been Italian Popes.

I agree. Since 78 the church has become pretty universal though.

I don’t see where its uncommon for Russians to prefer to be around Russians or Italians around their people. Martians around Martians. Human nature in much learned behavior. Basically its called prejudice Rubs off easily on children. Natural to be around your own culture. Its when we give off verbal or body signals that teach difference and disapproval is when the problems arrive.

Peace, Gary