I would have to look into the historical context of the situation. Sometimes it is right and just to take up the sword.
Again not what I asked. What I am asking is this: Which Catholic prelate said that the Eastern Orthodox cannot be expected to accept the development of Dogma that occured after 1054 AD?
It is right for Roman Catholics to take up the sword and kill their Eastern Orthodox neighbors? I don’t understand how it could be so according to the doctrine of “Love thy neighbor”? Do you reject the doctrine of “Love thy neighbor”?
It depends. The Catholic Church does teach just war theory. All I am saying, is that sometimes taking up the sword is right and just. For example, in WWII, it was right and just to go to war against the Nazi regime. I am simply suggesting that possibly, the Eastern Orthodox that Father Ambrose speaks of may have been engaging in some activity which merited a millitary response from the West. But I don’t know. I have to check out the historical context of the situation.
Sounds like the Catholics had a just reason to go to war against the Eastern Orthodox in this situation.
I think that we have to dialogue, forgive and re-unite for Christ. But please both have made great sins, and we have to forgive and to apologise. I think that.
I think that you are correct. Both Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians have committed terrible sins against eachother and it is best to beg eachother’s forgiveness and to really forgive one another. But that is not why I bring up these issues. I am simply trying to answer Fr. Ambrose’s question and to sort out his charges. In the mean time, I agree that forgiveness is the best way to bring the Eastern Orthodox back to the Church, espescially since the entire schism was nothing more than a comedy of errors.
Poland (historically Roman Catholic) had occupied the region for quite some time. There were attrocities on both sides. From our 21st century perspective we are always horrified by these accounts.
Khmelnitsky was attacking the Poles who had invaded his country and installed a repressive government and the Roman Catholic religion along with a great persecution of the Orthodox. He himself was educated by Polish Jesuits, accepted their line that it was right for Poland to be in his country, and for many years he fought in the Polish army, and very successfully. However, certain things made him realise that the Polish occupation of his country could not be tolerated - the Poles stole his own land, killed his son and raped his wife while he was away fighting for them! So he turned from a very competent officer in the Polish Army into a very successful Cossack guerilla fighter to free his country.
In order to kill Catholics
Not specifically Catholics. His desire was to free his homeland from a foreign invader and they happened to be Catholics. Prior to that he had been happy killing Tartars and others on behalf of the Catholic Poles and he even went to work as a soldier for a Catholic Cardinal and was a great success at killing everybody whom the Cardinal wanted killed.
In this case, yes. This was a case of fighting an enemy which had invaded. There was moral obligation to resist the invader.
In this case yes. Why? Because the Catholic Poles had invaded another country. Do you not think that people have the right to fight invaders? While religion played a part in this since the Poles were Catholic and the Ukrainians were Orthodox, the primary desire was to boot a foreign power out of the country.
So you agree with Catholics that war doesnt break down to the same category as random killings. The problem now is who decides when its war.
There is truth to this.
There is a big difference between random killing condemned in the Bible and war. In war the option to kill is on the table, and as far as defending/invading goes that all depends on the situation. It all depends on who has the larger army if its invasion or defense in many cases.
I thought that Jesus said “Blessed are the Peacemakers” and that He recommended that we love our neighbor. I would be opposed to killing Orthodox Christians because they have a more elaborate liturgy than what is available in the Western Church. I don’t understand why the Roman Catholic Pope would want to excommunicate people who are in favor of peace with Orthodox Christians.
There was the mob violence against Catholics in Constantinople. But technically speaking we cannot call that Orthodox violence against Catholics since it took place prior to the Great Schism. The people of Constantinople were as much Catholics under the Pope as the Italians Catholics whom they killed (also under the Pope.) It was Catholics killing Catholics, if you see what I mean.
Jesus also drove the money changers out of the Temple with a whip. IF, and this is a big “if”, Eastern Orthodox Christians were persecuting Catholics, it would be right and just to go to war against them.
Actually this does raise an interesting problem. The present trend with the last Pope seems to have been condemnation of war. However this did not prevent Roman Catholic soldiers from flying to Iraq. The line taken by the US bishops was contrary to the Pope’s. Only one Catholic bishop in the States,a Romanian, forbade Catholics to fight in Iraq under pain of mortal sin since he saw it, as the Pope did, as an unjust war.