P
PilgrimMichelangelo
Guest
Forgive me for my ignorance, but to which bear are you referring?
- Status
D
dochawk
Guest
Russia and the MP.
P
PilgrimMichelangelo
Guest
Oh. That Bear.
Which from a Catholic perspective (correct me if, I’m wrong) would lead to the necessity of the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary (i.e. Fatima) and her conversion to Catholicism…
Hmmm…a few threads of the tapestry are coming together…
D
dochawk
Guest
I don’t mean it as a problem from the Catholic end, or any requirement that Russia “switch” to Catholicism.
The ROC is actively trying to supplant the EP with the MP as the recognized leader, and to claim primacy. It simply won’t allow any arrangement in which Rome, too, is ahead of it in primacy.
The ROC is actively trying to supplant the EP with the MP as the recognized leader, and to claim primacy. It simply won’t allow any arrangement in which Rome, too, is ahead of it in primacy.
P
PilgrimMichelangelo
Guest
If the polemics issuing forth from the MP are any barometer of their temperament I would say that barring a miracle (which could happen) they are ready to split the entire Orthodox Church and anathematize “papism” (in whatever definition they eventually decide to adopt) and all who follow even a mild form of it (i.e. all Greek Churches). My hope would be for the ROC to come into communion with Rome and us to truly resolve these issues.
The history of this is enough to derail this thread, suffice it to say the Russians most emphatically believe in the “Third Rome Theory”:
https://www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/christianity/christianity-general/third-rome
Think “British-Israelism” or “American Exceptionalism” but an Orthodox version. There are even a few American Orthodox I know personally who have speculated about Washington D.C. and America as being the Fourth Rome…
Last edited:
G
George720
Guest
Some of us call it speculative banal pissanterie!
Others triumphalism and arrogance…
Prayer for one another is always a help…
Proclaiming one’s own superiority is not helpful…
I agree - Yet he did so, and it caused no outcry among any of the Churches…
IF the Church is DEFINED as Communion with Rome, then such an action would constitute Ecclesiastical self-immolation… Yet the whole Church just regarded it as a local dust-up between two Patriarchs that would blow over and get resolved soon enough - Almost a ho-hum… A mere little blip of no consequence on the radar of ecclesial life…
You see, the Patriarch of Constantinople does not and did not have authority over the Pope, who is the Patriarch of the Church of the West… Because no Patriarch has authority over any other Patriarch… Nor does the Papal Roman Patriarch have any authority over the Patriarch of Constantinople…
The same principle works locally - The Bishop of Toledo has no authority over the Bishop of Dallas… But the Metropolitan has authority over both… And Christ alone has Authority over the Patriarchates…
geo
G
George720
Guest
Yes - The Churches all have a ranking historically set, and this for the “Good Order” of the Church… Similarly to when two Priests concelebrate, the primary Priest is the one who was ordained before the other was… It takes ego out of the equation… Hence if the Roman Pope concelebrated with the Patriarch of Antioch, the presiding Patriarch would be the Pope, and not the Antiochian Primate… No authority of one over the other is a part of this… It is simply for the Good Order of the Church… Priests Commune first, then Deacons, then Sub-Deacons, then Readers, then men, then women (well, sometimes at least anyway
)… No one has jurisdiction outside their own jurisdiction, and the local Churches were all sui-juris Churches… Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria…Enough!
A
AlNg
Guest
Well what is the difference between:
the infallible declaration has changed and
the interpretation of the infallible declaration has changed?
P
Peter_Jericho
Guest
You might.
A
AlNg
Guest
So what. Catholics still say he is a saint as they do with St. Photius who is listed in the Melkite Church as a saint.
A
AlNg
Guest
Was it then a mortal sin for the Vatican representative to condemn the Eastern Patriarch Michael Cerularius and hence go into schism by breaking away from the Eastern Orthodox church?
A
AlNg
Guest
So a Jew or Buddhist or Hindu cannot be saved according to Unam Sanctam?
That is one of many reasons why you are not going to see any reunion between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics.
Last edited:
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
That’s pretty much what the late Fr. Joaquin Alonso, the official archivist of Fatima, said in his book.
catholic03
Well-known member
If EP stands for Ecumenical Patriarchate, then I would say that Bartholomew I is quite open - he apparently said reunification with Rome is inevitable, and he has been very involved in promoting relations with Rome.
He, however, seems to be the exception. Most other Orthodox bishops, especially the Russians, could not ever fathom reunifying with Rome.
Something that has been taught infallibly can never be changed. However, it could be stated even more clearly, or a theological conclusion that proceeds from it could be promulgated. EENS was taught three times by different popes, each with just a little different slant on the same dogma.HomeschoolDad:
Well what is the difference between:
the infallible declaration has changed and
the interpretation of the infallible declaration has changed?
Last edited:
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
The MP?Margaret_Ann:
If EP stands for Ecumenical Patriarchate, then I would say that Bartholomew I is quite open - he apparently said reunification with Rome is inevitable, and he has been very involved in promoting relations with Rome.
He, however, seems to be the exception. Most other Orthodox bishops, especially the Russians , could not ever fathom reunifying with Rome.
They wouldn’t even think of it.catholic03
Well-known member
Yes, the MP seems to be the most opposed. They were very annoyed when Pope John Paul II established an Archdiocese in Moscow.The MP?
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
They also don’t want Rome to acknowledge His Beatitude Sviatoslav as Patriarch either.
catholic03
Well-known member
No, they don’t. And they would be extremely opposed to any attempts to give the Russian Greek Catholic Church its own bishop, which they have been petitioning for.
If I am correct, then one of the reasons why the title of Major Archbishop was created was so that important Eastern Catholic bishops didn’t have to be called ‘Patriarch’, which would upset the Orthodox.
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
Touche. 
- Status