Is there a movement for Catholic and Orthodox to join back together?

[dochawk]

Example; The filioque. The filioque is supported by pre-Constantinople East and Western Fathers, as Latin expressed in the Nicene Creed. When the Father and the Son are consubstantial, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

No, only when you start from Latin.

In joint early theology, Christ certainly sends the Spirt (temporal procession), but the Spirit does not originate in Christ (procession per the greek)

When the Orthodox remove the filioque outside of the Nicene Creed as expressed in the Latin Rite. The Orthodox filioque creates a monster.

That’s a grammatical nightmare The Orthodox most certainly do not “remove”,but rather than fail to insert.

But, yes, translate the latin Filioque into greek with the same greek verb and you do not merely have a monster, but outright heresy!

hawk

 

[GEddie]

Sadly, where philosophers rule, philosophical differences become paramount; conversely, when fighting for life, such issues have a way of going poof.

ICXC NIKA

 

[brian_custer]

how about the roman & orthodox just say ’ it’s all over; NOW we are are a unified CHURCH; as we should’ve been for all these tears & years; THE SCHISM IS OVER

 

[AlNg]

We should unite under ‘One God’; our squabbling makes no sense.

True. But the Roman Catholic Church does not want to accept the suggestions for unity as given by the Orthodox Church. As long as the Roman Catholic Church does not budge from its position, I don’t see any chance of reunion.

how about the roman & orthodox just say ’ it’s all over; NOW we are are a unified CHURCH; as we should’ve been for all these tears & years; THE SCHISM IS OVER

The Roman Catholic Church will not agree to that. The Catholic Melkites put forward a modest proposal for reunion and it was soundly rejected by Cardinal Ratzinger.

 

[brian_custer]

i watched an ewtn video wherein an orthodox priest scalded Mother Angelica for saying that the HOLY SPIRIT “proceeded” from the Father; i didn’t understand ; is this what is DIVIDING Mother Church?

 

[AlNg]

This is one area of disagreement, but there are many others.

 

[brian_custer]

what is the most serious one that has been dividing Mother Church?

i think we can work this out…

 

[AlNg]

I don’t know which is the most serious. However, it cannot be worked out, because already the Catholic Melkite Church tried to reunite with the Eastern Orthodox Church and remain Catholic and Cardinal Ratzinger would not allow it.
Also, one of the posters said that the Russian Orthodox Church would never agree to a reunion. I think that this is false. If the Pope and all the Roman bishops made a confession of faith as did the Roman Catholic Jesuit priest in this video, then I believe that it would be possible for the Russian Orthodox Church to agree to a reunion provided a few other suggestions would be met. For a start, for a reunion with the Russian Orthodox Church, the Pope and all the Catholic bishops would make a profession of faith such as we see here, by a Catholic priest from the Vatican and reunite with the Orthodox church:

After that Catholics could agree to a few other suggestions such as: to allow a married clergy, to baptize by triple immersion, to eliminate most statues and replace them with traditional icons, to agree to stricter fasting rules, inclusion of a stronger epiclesis in the Mass. I think most Orthodox would accept the Latin method of making the sign of the cross, from left to right, even though this is historically wrong and is a novelty from the ancient tradition of right to left as it was in both East and West up until the Middle Ages (see the Catholic Encyclopedia). No guitar playing and generally no musical instrumentation at Mass, only the human voice. Except that bells would be allowed. There would have to be some other agreements such as mentioned in the 1848 Letter of the Patriarchs. But these suggestions might be a start to reunion of the two Churches.

 

[Rozellelily]

What is the reason for each one do the sign of the cross differently anyway?
Eg:I am Croatian so therefor Catholic and do the sign on the cross from left to right but Serbian Orthodox do it right to left.
Most “everyday people” don’t think of the why’s things are done a certain way,they just do according to tradition.
Isn’t this focus on “rules” anyway what puts people off Church and shouldn’t Christians just focus more on living everyday like Jesus and following his commandments of love thy neighbor and forgiveness etc regardless of what “type” of Christian they are?
To me,it seems that these “rules” just often cause division and fighting amongst people/denoms/religions more than do anything positive.

 

[Vonsalza]

The papacy. I think it consistently boils down to the papacy.

For the Orthodox, the Pope is neither infallible nor immediate in his jurisdiction. He’s first amongst equals like a chairman of the board.

In Catholicism he’s a monarch.

 

[stephen3]

To respond to the original question…have you heard about TLIG (True Life In God) movement ?
Go to the website and read the messages and the movement towards unity and see what has been happening and is happening …it not about something we see as possible or not it is about what God wants and what He is already doing about it and how we can be a part of His Plan.You will love Love!

 

[Eric_Hyom]

After that Catholics could agree to a few other suggestions such as: to allow a married clergy, to baptize by triple immersion, to eliminate most statues and replace them with traditional icons, to agree to stricter fasting rules, inclusion of a stronger epiclesis in the Mass. I think most Orthodox would accept the Latin method of making the sign of the cross, from left to right, even though this is historically wrong and is a novelty from the ancient tradition of right to left as it was in both East and West up until the Middle Ages (see the Catholic Encyclopedia). No guitar playing and generally no musical instrumentation at Mass, only the human voice. Except that bells would be allowed. There would have to be some other agreements such as mentioned in the 1848 Letter of the Patriarchs. But these suggestions might be a start to reunion of the two Churches.

None of these issues should stand in the way of unity. Jesus did not say the greatest commandment is to have icons and not statues. Start with the greatest commandments first, then everything else will fall into place.

 

[AlNg]

None of these issues should stand in the way of unity.

If so, then why would not the Roman Catholic Church agree to these suggestions in the interest of unity of the two churches?

 

[catholic1seeks]

A curious view, considering the Catholic Church understands Eastern expressions and theologies as being equivalent and just as worthy as – just as compatible with – the Roman tradition.

Hmmm…

But until the Roman Catholic Church recants of what we consider heresy, reunion will not be possible.

This cannot be the way forward. Both sides considers themselves as having the “orthodox” view. What the key is, is humility, love, and dialogue. Not just “We have all the answers, so sign up.”

 

[Vonsalza]

I think a liberal application of humility to the powers of the papacy would probably solve the problem, to be frank.

 

[brian_custer]

catholics should profess their faith? we do that every day.

you want us to profess the Faith your way (one time?); and we end a thousand year schism?

i’m on board for that…

 

[ziapueblo]

From the theological dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox Church:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...stuni_doc_20160921_sinodality-primacy_en.html

Worth reading.

ZP

 

[dochawk]

The Roman Catholic Church will not agree to that. The Catholic Melkites put forward a modest proposal for reunion and it was soundly rejected by Cardinal Ratzinger.

Actually, then Cardinal Ratzinger made statements that weren’t far off from the Zoghby Initiative (that nothing more, more less, than the first millennium relationship could be demanded of the Orthodox; that all that was missing for communion was communion itself).

I don’t know which is the most serious. However, it cannot be worked out, because already the Catholic Melkite Church tried to reunite with the Eastern Orthodox Church and remain Catholic and Cardinal Ratzinger would not allow it.

Actually, the Melkites in fact were in communion with both for more than a century a couple of hundred years ago.

After that Catholics could agree to a few other suggestions such as: to allow a married clergy, to baptize by triple immersion, to eliminate most statues and replace them with traditional icons, to agree to stricter fasting rules, inclusion of a stronger epiclesis in the Mass

There would be absolutely no need for identical liturgical practice for communion.

What is the reason for each one do the sign of the cross differently anyway?
Eg:I am Croatian so therefor Catholic and do the sign on the cross from left to right but Serbian Orthodox do it right to left.

Most Eastern Catholics are right to left.

Anyway, it came about several hundred years ago in the west. The people started following the priest’s hand as he blessed, resulting in the mirror image. That’s really all there is to it.

hawk

 

[AlNg]

There would be absolutely no need for identical liturgical practice for communion.

That is the Catholic POV. The Orthodox priest I spoke with said that the inclusion of the epiclesis was absolutely essential.

 

[dochawk]

There are some who insist on that particular issue, yes. And that one isn’t a huge deal: it has long been the western position that the epiclesis isn’t absent from the roman canon, but implicit.

hawk