M
Michael16
Guest
Amen, @OrbisNonSufficit.
I’m sorry, guys if I’m going off the rails. It seems like I lit off a firestorm.
I’m sorry, guys if I’m going off the rails. It seems like I lit off a firestorm.
Is there a real chance of communion between the Catholic Church and the orthodox?
- Status
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
No, since according to Vatican II, Protestants are considered Ecclesiastical Communities and not Churches with Apostolic succession.
Agreed, Orthodox and Catholics are not in communion with one another.
Sure, bit Church A and C are still in semi-communion with one another because Church C is in communion with B. I know it’s different than Roman Catholic ecclesiology but both A and C are still fully Orthodox and share the same faith. The reason A and C are not in Eucharistic communion is because if a disagreement, political or jurisdictional. Not theological.
ZP
M
Michael16
Guest
How can that be unity, @ziapueblo?
All this different rigamarole about who’s in communion or not with who? How’s that a way to run a Church?
As for the Protestants: They’re not in communion with us because they got kicked out or left on their own and don’t even recognize the papacy in the first place.
Heck: The Protestants disagree with us on almost every bit of doctrine. You can’t even talk with them about any council later than the seven ecumenical councils and even then they have a twisted, revisionist preconception of them. They act like they’re part of the Church when they’re not.
All this different rigamarole about who’s in communion or not with who? How’s that a way to run a Church?
As for the Protestants: They’re not in communion with us because they got kicked out or left on their own and don’t even recognize the papacy in the first place.
Heck: The Protestants disagree with us on almost every bit of doctrine. You can’t even talk with them about any council later than the seven ecumenical councils and even then they have a twisted, revisionist preconception of them. They act like they’re part of the Church when they’re not.
Last edited:
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
George, please don’t take this personally but imo that almost sounds like the Protestant belief of sola fide. Let me put it this way: Protestants don’t need sacraments, the papacy etc because they believe in sola fide. Now you posted that the EOC trusts in Christ acting through the Ekklesia. How do you know that Christ IS acting through the Ekklesia when the various Orthodox communities can’t agree on Baptism, Chrismation and are at each other’s throats (I’m referring to the Moscow-Constantinopolitan debacle).
If you’re referring to AL, it’s an Apostolic Exhortation which is not infallible vs Munificentissimus Deus which IS infallible. All the conditions laid down by Vatican I (1869-70) have to be met in order for the charism of infallibility to come into play. The charism of infallibility is a negative charism, i.e. it protects the Holy Father from defining error and the Church from being bound by error. It doesn’t mean that the Pope is infallible in everything.
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
Support? All Churches, with the exception of the MP and the ROCOR, are in communion with the EP.
ZP
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
You’re OK, Michael.
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
Okay… still we are hurt by not being in communion with them. Vatican 2 does not deny their spiritual worth to the Church as children of God. But being in communion with someone who denies ecclesiologic as well as dogmatic definitions of the Faith and the Church would be worse scenario. For this reason, Church does not foster communion with them. Same would apply to Orthodox in a sense of ecclesiology (and sometimes even in dogmatic definitions, in rare cases admittedly).
I don’t think semi-communion is desirable. By your logic, if my Bishop swims away, establishes new Church in Antarctica and starts preaching that Catholics and Orthodox are Schismatics and Heretics, we are all missing out on not being in communion with this “Church” of his with valid Apostolic Succession and Eucharist. And there is no real harm in converting to this Church as by Vatican 2 logic this would be valid Church… and even further according to your semi “branch theory”, if Orthodox and Catholics do not heal this Schism, Church of Christ will never be fully united.
Not just Roman, but entire Catholic ecclesiology. Was there even an instance Catholic Churches were in such situation? I doubt so, because of Rome being able to solve this authoritatively when it occurs.
My point is that those faithful realize Schism and their souls are endangered thanks for it (Schism being a mortal sin). Unity of the Church is disrupted, and no solution to it exists as one Church can just keep rejecting any outcome where they do not get what they want… and even if that is the case, everyone is missing out because they are not in communion with them, and Church of Christ will not be united unless they submit to any demands this Church may have.
Oh well, let me rephrase. I did hear/see several Patriarchs give vocal support to Moscow, but not break the communion.
M
Michael16
Guest
@George720,
With all love to you, man; I agree with @Margaret_Ann. Protestants make a similar argument about papal authority as you guys do. At least with you guys, we can talk the same language: You guys have Apostolic Succession, a valid priesthood and all seven Sacraments.
We can talk business.
The problem is: How can there be unity when many of your guys’ upper management won’t talk to the other guys’ upper management?
It’s institutionalized chaos, brother.
With all love to you, man; I agree with @Margaret_Ann. Protestants make a similar argument about papal authority as you guys do. At least with you guys, we can talk the same language: You guys have Apostolic Succession, a valid priesthood and all seven Sacraments.
We can talk business.
The problem is: How can there be unity when many of your guys’ upper management won’t talk to the other guys’ upper management?
It’s institutionalized chaos, brother.
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
I have to take a brief intermission and do the dishes. Back soon. 
Last edited:
M
Michael16
Guest
@ziapueblo,
I just don’t understand how you guys can live in a system where communion is broken over politics and jurisdiction troubles and everything boils down to assembling coalitions to win in councils.
I love you guys, but sheesh. It’s a mess I couldn’t live under.
I just don’t understand how you guys can live in a system where communion is broken over politics and jurisdiction troubles and everything boils down to assembling coalitions to win in councils.
I love you guys, but sheesh. It’s a mess I couldn’t live under.
M
Michael16
Guest
See you soon, @Margaret_Ann!
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
From following statements:
and George defining Church (Ekklesia) as being people of “One Faith” earlier, with no need for hierarchies to actually agree…
it can be logically deduced that there is no need for hierarchy from Orthodox viewpoint. You need valid Bishop with valid Faith, but he does not need to submit to jurisdiction of anyone else, he can be in schism from anyone else and it will be considered issue of “upper management”. Faithful are technically receiving True Faith from him, he is his own primate and he has apostolic succession. Everything works out, except for the fact he does not even need any other Bishop to be in communion with him. Hierarchy of the Church is abandoned itself.
Last edited:
G
George720
Guest
We are living the Mystery - The stuff you see as oh-so-crucial we but see at top-fluff…
We call it the DOC - Department of Corrections!
(Actually we don’t, but it was fun to say…
)Church politics and jurisdictional disputes are but belly bumping at the top, you see… Meanwhile, the underlying Faith of Christ is being lived out much as low-level Latin Laity are living out their Salvation regardless of upper echelon Latin disputations…
If a particular local practice is not causing too much of a ruckus, we don’t worry about it all that much… You guys seem to want to turn everything into a Federal Case, get an authoritarian ruling on the matter with one size fits all, and cram it down everyone’s throats… If you like to run your own local Church that way, you are free to do so - But you do not have jurisdiction in Antioch or Russia, and we had a post showing some fairly upscale RCC’ers demonizing Putin burning in hell, remember? Jurisdiction is a geographical matter, and other geographic jurisdictions, in Orthodox Ekklesiology, do not have any jurisdiction outside their own geographical boundaries… Yes, a Patriarch can be declared a heretic and expelled from the Church by an Ecumenical Council, but Rome cannot depose him, nor can Antioch nor Russia…
And you have in fact affirmed your Papal prerogative to pre-empt the whole Church if he so sees fit without opposition… You cannot have it both ways - Collegial and Autocratic…
geo
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
Churches have been in and out of communion with one another at various times, since even before the Great Schism.
ZP
M
Michael16
Guest
In all fairness, @OrbisNonSufficit; I think it’s more of a situation of a parliament without a head.
Just coalition building and conciliar politicking.
Just coalition building and conciliar politicking.
M
Michael16
Guest
Well, @ziapueblo; at least under the Pope, things are A LOT more stable.
M
Michael16
Guest
That’s an unfair characterization, @George720.
At least with our troubles among the bishops; the Church doesn’t split over non sense and usually the bishops hash things out amongst themselves and the Holy Father doesn’t have to go all Emperor Palpatine on us.
And seriously, dude? Living the Mystery?
At least with our troubles among the bishops; the Church doesn’t split over non sense and usually the bishops hash things out amongst themselves and the Holy Father doesn’t have to go all Emperor Palpatine on us.
And seriously, dude? Living the Mystery?
Last edited:
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
I see many Catholics complaining about the “mess” you all are living under with Francis. There’s disunity in the Catholic Church for sure, it’s just different disunity.
Check this latest episode of Reason & Theology (they are in no way as balanced as they once were, it’s now almost strictly as RC show but I tune in every so often):
The guy converted from Anglicanism because of women ordinations. I know plenty of RC friends that are scared to death of the possibility of women ordination is on the horizon.
ZP
M
Michael16
Guest
I’ll admit @ziapueblo: I’m old school about women ordination. When I was still ELCA; I was really uncomfortable with the idea of lady pastors.
At least with our mess, our bishops don’t break communion over non sense squabbles. The Church goes on and eventually everything’s settled.
At least with our mess, our bishops don’t break communion over non sense squabbles. The Church goes on and eventually everything’s settled.
Last edited:
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
I am sure you can. Collegiate approach is the ideal, but when it fails there is still autocratic one by God to fix it. It works same in Orthodoxy- if Synod was held and Bishops came together, then God revealed to them His Divine Will, they would submit to him… I doubt anyone would say God is too autocratic and does not work in collegiate manner.
Sure, but what is the need for Church hierarchy then? Is it just a nuisance? Should communion between Bishops just be defined by faith with no need for real collegiality?
Not ideal one. Also according to both Eastern and Western ecclesiology, Body of Christ can not be divided. One can be either part of it or not. I heard this from Orthodox Christian first, who said that East-West Schism did not tear body of Christ, but that Latins separated from it. Terming is logical as indeed, Christ can not be out of communion with himself. His finger can not be outside of communion with his leg… etc…
It was actually EC, not RC, but I get the point.
No, we want there to always be a possibility of final ruling where faithful know whether or not their Bishop is doing will of Christ without being top-notch canonists, theologians and historians themselves. St. Paul did warn against Schism and you portrait it as desireable… should not Church prevent stuff like that? Why would preventing it be wrong?
How is that connected? I don’t follow… do you mean to say that it should not be revealed which side in the disputes inside Orthodoxy is right and it should just stay mystery? What is good in that?
Not canonical one, not with communion. We have our fair share of problems, but those do not stem from Papacy. Would Pope Francis be just Latin Patriarch, problems would have been the same…
Last edited:
- Status