If RC and Orthodox follow the same apostolic tradition

[Isaac14]

Orbis:
You have kept insisting that Orthodox churches that break communion are just “seeking attention”. I’ve explained this yet you seem to ignore what I’ve said and apply your own understanding claiming to just quote my words. That can not lead to discussion in good faith.

Further I find it amazing you are so willing to casually dismiss the work of these joint commissions. Your church’s own bishops and theologians are participating and agreeing to the statements which are published on the Vatican website. Do you really think your own clergy and theologians would agree to statements contrary to your Church? Do you think they are not working under the approval of the Pope and the rest of your bishops?

 

[TomH1]

But are you saying that Orthodoxy’s self understanding as being one church is wrong? We are one church in multiple jurisdictions.

No, that is not what I have said at all. What I am saying is there is neither a person nor a body of persons in Orthodoxy who can say yes to reunion with the Catholic Church. It would take at least 15 different jurisdictions to agree. If you think that is going to happen any time in the foreseeable future you are I believe being over optimistic to the extent of naivety. If the Orthodox cannot agree among their jurisdictions on Orthodox matters they are not going to be ready to reach common agreement on reunion with Catholicism. And, speaking of jurisdictions many of the Eastern Catholic churches are a sore point with the Orthodox.

I am curious what you think is driving separation.

It is nothing new. The differences have been driving the separation for over a millennium. If you want to know what the differences are go and research them. It is very interesting although, of course, sad and depressing.

I wish both Catholics and Orthodox would focus on what is similar and follow the lead of our hierarchs that participate in the official dialogues between our churches in working to common understandings of these various issues.

I do not celebrate our separation but it would be to ignore the elephant in the room not to recognise it exists. Sadly, to date that is all we have: nicely worded statements. There is nothing much concrete, though, in the way of action. Perhaps this Easter/Pascha we should pray for the healing of the Body of Christ which we humans have fractured.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

That can not lead to discussion in good faith.

No, but I did not mean to offend you by typing exactly same what you said either- when you said it, it was fine, when I said it, it was insulting. I don’t understand that.

Further I find it amazing you are so willing to casually dismiss the work of these joint commissions.

Never said that I’m dismissing it, I said I can ignore them until they become dogmatic without impeding my unity with Church, but I can’t ignore Ecumenical Councils that in my view deny those works- or their usual interpretation. Perhaps I’m more inclined to dismiss interpretation of those works rather than works themselves, no idea yet, will try to get clear opinion on that asap.

Do you really think your own clergy and theologians would agree to statements contrary to your Church?

Greeks surely thought so at Councils of Florence or Lyons, which was much more serious and actually attended by Patriarchs. I don’t get why me dismissing works of even lesser assemblies of people who “just” represent Patriarchs and don’t proclaim anything dogmatic for either Church (unlike Florence heh) is worse.

Do you think they are not working under the approval of the Pope and the rest of your bishops?

They are, therefore I trust Pope will lead us well, but until that becomes dogma I could even hate on it- which I’m not doing, I’m just skeptical. Bishops at Florence did work under approval under Ecumenical Patriarchate and other Patriarchs (or at least primates, to my knowledge) and even had majority of Bishops on their side, but that did not stop Orthodox from proclaiming their faith and saying Council was not dogmatic and that they overstepped their authority. Us, Catholics, can’t do that if Pope proclaims dogmatic status of any document- but that also means we can unless Pope does so. If Pope approves of those documents in that interpretation, I will try to change my views, be obedient and try to somehow cope with how that actually does not contradict other Ecumenical Councils, but until then Ecumenical Councils have higher authority for me, personally.

 

[Isaac14]

when you said it, it was fine, when I said it, it was insulting. I don’t understand that.

You asserted breaking communion was just seeking attention. I equated that to the attention seeking little child, then continued to say that is NOT what is happening when a church breaks communion with another. A break signifies there is a very serious issue that all the churches need to pay attention to. Attention seeking behavior and drawing attention to a serious matter are not the same thing. You have persisted in calling it attention seeking. I further pointed out that the primates of four churches (Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, & Cypress) met to discuss Ukraine. Most other churches are discussing as well how to respond; they ARE paying attention to the seriousness of the matter as demanded by the break in communion between Russia and Constantinople. I also repeat that these matter take time to discuss, debate and resolve.

I said I can ignore them

I don’t get why me dismissing works of even lesser assemblies of people who “just” represent Patriarchs and don’t proclaim anything dogmatic for either Church (unlike Florence heh) is worse.

but until that becomes dogma I could even hate on it- which I’m not doing, I’m just skeptical.

These commissions are doing the ground work to lay a foundation on which true restoration of communion can be built.They are comprised of Catholic and Orthodox bishops and theologians deliberating through serious issues and coming to points of agreement on various topics. This is why these are so truly important. This was not done in previous attempts at reunion and you can see the lack of fruit of those efforts. These commissions have been constituted precisely to avoid that failure. Dismissing their work as “non-dogmatic” dodges the importance of what is being done.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

These commissions are doing the ground work to lay a foundation on which true restoration of communion can be built.

as was Florence. According to Orthodox, Florence heavily favored Catholics to the point it was not viable form of unity. In my opinion, if we keep primacy of honor for Pope, we do reverse things. My opinion, sure, but while I do not have respect of other theologians, I am as binding as they are at the moment.

This is why these are so truly important.

I agree, but I don’t like where this is heading especially the way they are used on internet forums. To be completely honest I have not read entire document yet, only passages but taken out of context, they kinda freaked me out. I’ll take my time to formulate my opinion on this, I’m just saying that right now they pose no problems to my current position either.

This was not done in previous attempts at reunion

What? Debates were huge part of Florence, to the point Mark of Ephesus WON debate on Purgatorial Fires and hence we, Catholics, are BOUND to follow his view.

Dismissing their work as “non-dogmatic” dodges the importance of what is being done.

No, it just dodges contradiction. Again, I have not read entire things but the fact Pope could annul Eastern synods at will was explicitly stated by Pope Saint Gregory, as well as him upholding importance, honor and dignity of other Patriarchs AND Bishops. I do believe Pope Gregory’s stance to be most correct, as while Pope would not be limited by anything (neither was Pope Gregory), he would have to take into account dignity and rights of Eastern Patriarchs (and perhaps Latin too). I actually like clause from Florene added to Melkite’s signature of Vatican I document on Infallibility of Pope- " except the rights and privileges of Eastern patriarchs".

Same way Florence could be dodged back then, I can dodge this- difference is, I can dodge this for now. If Church defines that to be dogmatic, I’ll obey. There is virtually nothing forcing Orthodox to obey their Bishops if they believe they are in Schism, which I highlighted on another thread. Florence was also made up of many debates (yes, Emperor silenced his Bishops, not really Latin fault though, more like fault on side of Caesaropapism)- to say it was completely controlled by Latins would be unfair. Pro-Latin Greeks actually explained Greek dogmas in Latin light and terminology and both sides agreed that they do not understand each other because they do not wish to understand each other. I’d also say Bessarion, Greek Bishop, shattered arguments of anti-unionists (but that’s matter of opinion I guess). There was a debate, and far more interesting than these ones are, I dare say. As Catholic, I believe that debate to be influenced by Holy Spirit.

If you deny my right to dodge this document, you deny rights of Orthodoxy to dodge Council of Florence and Council of Lyons. I assure you I’m fairly fine with that tradeoff.

 

[Isaac14]

I don’t deny you your right to dodge the dozens of agreed statements.

However I see no reason for us to continue our conversation given that you don’t even respect the work of your own Church’s Bishops and theologians who are involved in these decades-long dialogues.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

However I see no reason for us to continue our conversation given that you don’t even respect the work of your own Church’s Bishops and theologians who are involved in these decades-long dialogues.

Imagine Latin Scholar saying that after Florence Union broke down to any Orthodox. Yet Catholics did not give up trying to reunite. You can cease conversation, that’s your choice, but it would be a shame. I enjoyed learning about Orthodoxy from you. As I said, I did not read entire agreed statements, let alone dozens of them. My opinion right now is not clear- all I can say for sure is that I reject their internet passages that were probably taken out of context (or could have been).

 

[ziapueblo]

I further pointed out that the primates of four churches (Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, & Cypress) met to discuss Ukraine.

Yup, here they are:

Four primates pledge to continue working together for the good of the Church / OrthoChristian.Com

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

@OrbisNonSufficit, as @Isaac14 has said, in Orthodoxy if a Patriarch gets out of line the other Patriarchs can correct him. Like Paul did to Peter. That is what is going on between the MP and EP. That is what is going on between the Antiochian Patriarch and Jerusalem Patriarch. Despite this, these Churches meet with one another. They still see each other as canonical. Recently, delegates from the EP met with delegates form the MP.

ZP (not Zia Patriarch lol)

 

[Isaac14]

ZP (not Zia Patriarch lol)

I kind of like the sound of that!

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Paul did not break Eucharistic Communion with Peter, nor did he try replacing him, I’m probably gonna leave it be, I’ll never understand that but I perceived breaking of Eucharistic Communion as last resort. If they see each other as canonical, why would MP send Russian Priests to jurisdiction of EP so they could serve their faithful- that would be breaching jurisdiction if they were in Eucharistic Communion, so what is difference now?

Yep I said I’ll leave it be, then I asked a question… uhm nvm “leave it be” thing I guess.

 

[dochawk]

. Catholic Church considers Orthodoxy to be in Schism, not sure about Orthodox Churches stance.

As a broad. overgeneralization, the Orthodox consider the Roman church rot have left Orthodoxy, and to c currently be heterodox.

For some this is a strident position, for others an observation, and others a minor issue or even misunderstanding.

The width of the schism is widely overstated. In all seriousness, it would end in years, not decades, without the Russian Orthodox positions at the moment–and the Russians are currently in schism with Constantinople.

I can’t find much about Western Orthodox, unlucky.

There really aren’t all that many of them, so there isn’t a lot written.

As I understand it, almost all WRO are converts from either RC or Protestantism.

They are however great example of how Orthodox Church uses unleavened bread too so I did not delete them.

I believe that the Romanians also use unleavened bread.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

For some this is a strident position, for others an observation, and others a minor issue or even misunderstanding.

If it were so minor, Magisteriums of both Churches would have realized by now- if they did not there’s a good chance laity is missing something if they make assumptions it’s minor issue or just misunderstanding solely- or rather if they pretend it does not matter.

There really aren’t all that many of them, so there isn’t a lot written.

As I understand it, almost all WRO are converts from either RC or Protestantism.

For now, they should grow in time anyway.

I believe that the Romanians also use unleavened bread.

Wow, that’s even more interesting tbh.

 

[dochawk]

If it were so minor, Magisteriums of both Churches would have realized by now- if they did not there’s a good chance laity is missing something if they make assumptions it’s minor issue or just misunderstanding solely- or rather if they pretend it does not matter.

The various C/O Church pairs are wildly different in their level of investment in the schism. Melkite/Antiochian Orthodox are now, I believe, building every new church in their region for joint use, family members and clergy transition back and forth with some regularity, and intercommunion is quite common.

I also wouldn’t be surprised to see the non-MP Ukrainian Orthodox and Catholic merge.

Note that the Melkites have spent extended periods in simultaneous communion with Rome and Orthodoxy . . .

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Note that the Melkites have spent extended periods in simultaneous communion with Rome and Orthodoxy . . .

well, kinda… they spent extended periods of time not rejecting communion with Rome. It’s a slight different from scenario where Maronites remained in communion.

 

[AlNg]

I believe that the Romanians also use unleavened bread.

I thought it was the Armenians.

 

[ziapueblo]

and intercommunion is quite common.

I think many people would be surprised how frequent intercommunion is! In small villages in the “old country” or the Middle East I don’t think Greek Catholics and Orthodox see any difference between each other. Of course, this is at the parish level.

First rule about intercommunion club, at least here in the US, don’t talk about intercommunion club

ZP

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

I believe that the Romanians also use unleavened bread.

My Orthodox Priest & family are all immigrants from Romania…Leavened Bread is what is exclusively used for the Holy Eucharist. Perhaps, Romanian Catholics use Unleavened?

 

[ziapueblo]

Holy Resurrection Monastery in St. Nazianz, Romanian Greek Catholic, uses leavened bread.

ZP

 

[dochawk]

I thought it was the Armenians.

It could be. Now where did my cheat sheet go?

 

[CoffeeFanatic]

I know OO that are allowed to commune in EO parishes here in the US. But, you’re right, we usually don’t talk about it.