Is Orthodox Christianity seen as a place where the Catholic & Protestant Churches could possibly reunite?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nektarios_Lady
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomdstone said:
I gave you an example of an RC practice which does not date from the first millenium.
Click to expand...
Be honest…you have the same problem, Tom. As Fr. Adrian Fortescue notes:

The great weakness of Orthodox theology and the radical affliction from which the Orthodox Church suffers is arrested development…In spite of their boast of unchanging antiquity, their theology, rites and Canon Law represent not the first ages but a comparatively advanced development, that of the Byzantine Period. And they stay there, satisfying neither the need of continuous development that is the mark of a living Church, nor the rival ideal of unchanged primitive observance." (Adrian Fortescue, The Orthodox Eastern Church, 1920; pp.393-394)
 
Liturgical abuse has to be seen in relation to Canon law which for example with eucharistic celebration/consecration a sacred place is required, unless in a particular case necessity requires otherwise; in which case the celebration must be in a fitting place. This is seen in examples of the military or detention centers etc. So I don’t see the merit in the hyperbole of my building is prettier than yours conversations in relation to Christs infallibility and ministers in relation to salvation. They can save your soul, and in the middle of no-where in other words and have continuously since the first century.
 
Why do you think these grotesque liturgical abuses in the Catholic Church happen in the first? Could it be this spirit of development that seems to have run amok? I mean if you can completely rewrite the liturgy you have to expect more innovation. When the biggest complaint you can muster against Orthodoxy is that we don’t change things I think that’s extraordinarily telling. 🤷
 
Why do you think these grotesque liturgical abuses
Click to expand...
You seemed to miss the point that liturgical abuse is an accusation with no basis but grotesque distortion in light of everything stated above. Its your burden of proof to make a long story short. To repeat underwhelming comments doesn’t prove a point or help it.
 
Peter_J said:
When you think about it, there are good and bad apples in every bunch. Anyone with much experience with the internet knows that there are Catholics who are hostile to the Orthodox and Orthodox who are hostile to Catholics. (Which is not meant as a put down to anyone who doesn’t have enough internet experience to know that – heck, I often think I should spend less time here and more time reading joint statements and other documents on the Vatican’s website. :o :))
Click to expand...
I don’t usually quote my own posts, but I’m thinking that a couple of thoughts ought to be added to ^^ this.

One is that, when I say that “there are Catholics who are hostile to the Orthodox and Orthodox who are hostile to Catholics” it should be understood that I don’t mean to imply that hostility is always in the same form. Indeed, my experience indicate that the two directions of hostility take very different forms.

Secondly and more importantly, doesn’t anyone ever wonder why so many Orthodox focus so hard on those Catholics who are strongly anti-Orthodox? And, conversely, why so many Catholics focus so hard on those Orthodox who are strongly anti-Catholic? To me it’s an extremely noticeable phenomenon.
 
Peter_J said:
Secondly and more importantly, doesn’t anyone ever wonder why so many Orthodox focus so hard on those Catholics who are strongly anti-Orthodox? And, conversely, why so many Catholics focus so hard on those Orthodox who are strongly anti-Catholic? To me it’s an extremely noticeable phenomenon.
Click to expand...
Maybe it’s just that none of the pleasant people log into forums like this. 😉
 
Seraphim73 said:
When the biggest complaint you can muster against Orthodoxy is that we don’t change things I think that’s extraordinarily telling. 🤷
Click to expand...
Fr. Fortescue opines that what you have is liturgy that is neither “early” nor “modern” but oddly medieval…which satisfies neither the desire for genuine apostolicity nor the needs of the contemporary Church.
 
I don’t usually debate the point, but to me it seems if I am to say; “I believe in the one Holy Catholic Church” then I should believe her teaching, otherwise how could I say I believe? I think we are very fortunate to be able celebrate in todays form in relation to many points in history as mentioned. But, if I say for example I believe in one but not the other, than I should be able and prepared to make my case as to why, I would think. Again for myself, if I suggest I only believe in this or that form, then I would have to be honest and say I really don’t believe what the Church is teaching. Simply not the case, I do believe in their ability to celebrate wherever the Lord sends them in His vineyard.
 
Randy_Carson said:
Be honest…you have the same problem, Tom. As Fr. Adrian Fortescue notes:

The great weakness of Orthodox theology and the radical affliction from which the Orthodox Church suffers is arrested development…In spite of their boast of unchanging antiquity, their theology, rites and Canon Law represent not the first ages but a comparatively advanced development, that of the Byzantine Period. And they stay there, satisfying neither the need of continuous development that is the mark of a living Church, nor the rival ideal of unchanged primitive observance." (Adrian Fortescue, The Orthodox Eastern Church, 1920; pp.393-394)
Click to expand...
There is a difference in the degree of the change. It is like cold water versus lukewarm water on the one hand and cold water versus boiling water scalding hot on the other.
 
GaryTaylor said:
You seemed to miss the point that liturgical abuse is an accusation with no basis but grotesque distortion in light of everything stated above.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that there is no basis to “liturgical abuse”? Here is an example of a Roman Catholic Bishop celebrating a puppet mass with dancing.
youtube.com/watch?v=rh_nqtp3VrU
Perhaps this is not “liturgical abuse” but I suspect that some in the Eastern Orthodox tradition might consider the Mass to be somewhat modernistic and a bit of a change from the Mass as celebrated during the first millennium?
 
Tomdstone said:
Are you saying that there is no basis to “liturgical abuse”?
Perhaps this is not “liturgical abuse”
Click to expand...
No your saying its abuse than suggesting it isn’t. And I guess you are tonights rep for the EO perhaps you suspect wrong in assuming what they think. :rolleyes:
 
GaryTaylor said:
No your saying its abuse than suggesting it isn’t. And I guess you are tonights rep for the EO perhaps you suspect wrong in assuming what they think. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
True. I only know what I read on some of the EO blogs where some have expressed concern about union with Roman Catholics because of liturgical issues.
 
Randy_Carson said:
Ah, but now we have the Internet, and people can finally read for themselves what the Early Church Fathers actually said about the supremacy and universal jurisdiction rather than relying on what the pamphleteers have told them.
Click to expand...
That’s funny, given that you seem to have acquired most of your patristic quotations from the modern day equivalent of pamphleteers—apologists. Until you can read the fathers in Latin and Greek, or at the very least, check translations of them, you are very much at the mercy of the translators who make these florilegia and without any recourse to the original passage to check the context. There have been, in fact, several quotes which have been presented here over the past few weeks (one by St. Theodore the Studite comes immediately to my mind) which are blatantly ripped out of context (in the one by St. Theodore, he basically stresses the importance of the institution of the Pentarchy in the sentence before the English translation starts).
 
Tomdstone said:
The reuinion of Catholic and Orthodox could easily take place if the Catholic Church would change only a few things, such as:
infallibility and Supremacy of the Pope
filioque
Purgatory and indulgences
…
Click to expand...
If they accept the first one, the rest get straightened out. 😃
 
“The people in charge now are looking for common ground rather than what’s wrong with the other side,” he said. “They have finally figured out that they have so many areas of common concern that it so much more effective to speak together.”
Click to expand...
But beneath the pledges to strengthen ties, the Pope and Patriarch face a number of hurdles, principally the divisions within the Orthodox Church. While Francis is the ultimate authority over a single church, Bartholomew is seeking to align a dizzying array of more than a dozen self-governing Orthodox churches from Serbia to Syria, which must all agree on terms of negotiation with Rome before they take up uniform positions on a glut of liturgical issues.
Click to expand...
Importantly, Russian Orthodox Christians, who together with the Ukrainian church make up the majority of Orthodox Christians, have a chilly relationship with the Vatican, one that could limit the clerics ability to present a united front on some issues such a persecution of middle east Christians, theologians say.
Click to expand...
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CEoQqQIwBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fpope-francis-to-meet-orthodox-church-head-in-istanbul-as-part-of-effort-to-bolster-relations-1417187501&ei=4QF7VOLuNsWdNvWEhIAE&usg=AFQjCNFQFDZvd_cj_g0NB_JNoE-DY6KseQ
28 Oct 2014
Click to expand...
CWN - Following a four-day meeting in Lviv, 45 Eastern Catholic bishops in Europe issued a joint statement on ecumenism, mission, and the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East.
Click to expand...
“We reaffirm with greater awareness our right and duty to the pastoral care of our faithful wherever they are, including the right to proclaim the Gospel to those who do not know it yet,” the prelates said.
Click to expand...
“We affirm that the division of the one Church of Christ is an ecclesiological anomaly which cannot be considered as a standard for the life and mission of the Church,” they continued. “We share with the Orthodox churches the same concern for the cultural and social trends that are leading to a progressive de-Christianization and secularization of Europe.”
Click to expand...
The ROC says it is not the state church of Russia
Click to expand...
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Farticle%2F2014%2F10%2F06%2Fus-ukraine-crisis-church-insight-idUSKCN0HV0MH20141006&ei=kgl7VOL_JcyWNozdgcgC&usg=AFQjCNFqqvySlbxlGZruUY0MQkyG-XUhpQ

Does the ROC seem like a place Christians can unite as per the OP?
 
Tomdstone said:
There is a difference in the degree of the change. It is like cold water versus lukewarm water on the one hand and cold water versus boiling water scalding hot on the other.
Click to expand...
If you acknowledge that Orthodoxy has changed things, then so much for the accusation that Catholics have done so.

You can argue degrees, but we are both guilty according to you.
 
Randy_Carson said:
If you acknowledge that Orthodoxy has changed things, then so much for the accusation that Catholics have done so.

You can argue degrees, but we are both guilty according to you.
Click to expand...
Your reasoning here doesn’t address the problem at hand because the minor changes in the Orthodox Church are acceptable to the Roman Catholic Church. Take for example, in the USA, where women do not wear headcovering in many Orthodox Churches. Previously, a century or so ago, women did wear headcovering in Church. Now the custom has changed, at least in the USA. The Roman Catholic Church has no objection to this change which has occurred in some EO Churches. . However, on the other side, the Eastern Orthodox community, at least as I understand it, does have objections to what they say are serious theological innovations they see as having been introduced by the Roman Catholic Church such as papal doctrines, filioque, modern liturgical permutations, and several others.
 
Cavaradossi said:
That’s funny, given that you seem to have acquired most of your patristic quotations from the modern day equivalent of pamphleteers—apologists. Until you can read the fathers in Latin and Greek, or at the very least, check translations of them, you are very much at the mercy of the translators who make these florilegia and without any recourse to the original passage to check the context. There have been, in fact, several quotes which have been presented here over the past few weeks (one by St. Theodore the Studite comes immediately to my mind) which are blatantly ripped out of context (in the one by St. Theodore, he basically stresses the importance of the institution of the Pentarchy in the sentence before the English translation starts).
Click to expand...
Schmemann - Post #143.
Fortescue - Post #148.

🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top