Orthodox leader stresses unity in truth, as he speaks of unity with Catholicism

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Yes, I know this belief is controversial, and, yes, I agree it is “tiresome” - for both of us, I suppose ; nonetheless, the controversy has to do with the specific request to i) consecrate Russia (explicitly) to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by ii) all the Catholic Bishops throughout the whole world (not the Pope singularly consecrating Russia or, contrawise, all the Catholic Bishops throughout the whole world consecrating the entire world to her Immaculate Heart, which only implicitly includes Russia).

Pax,
Tim

THAT has not been done. Wish it would, though.

 

[Radical]

Joe, I’m not sure this is a fair characterization of Catholics as being the mom and pop religion of Protestantism.

Agreed. We aspire to a better ancestry than can be offered by either the Catholics or the Orthodox…we have but one Father, and he is in heaven.

I understand the argument but am not convinced by it.

well, I guess it is akin to calling Christianity the child of Judaism.

The Catholic Church cannot control all heretics and their intentions and they cannot head off everyone at the pass… The polemics and labels aren’t helpful just as orthodox (small o) Catholics calling their fellow Catholics “cafeteria Catholics” isn’t helpful.

…didn’t you just label protestants as “heretics” here? …and if so, is that helpful?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Aw, Radical, you were on a roll then you lost me and took things wrong. The whole argument is that Protestants are heretics than sprang from Catholicism. I’m not calling anyone heretics per se but saying that from the Orthodox perspective, heretics sprang from the parent of Catholicism. I’m just using their words to describe Protestants and the word Catholics use as well. You’re trying to catch me in a hypocritical moment and I can appreciate the misunderstanding. Far from it. I’ve been in an Anglican parish for quite a while now and would be calling myself a heretic, friend. I also use the word “illicit” to describe how Catholics view our Anglican sacraments because that is the term they use. I am not saying I feel they are “illicit.” I also use the word “absolutely null and utterly void” to coin the Catholic view of the validity of Anglican orders. I’m paraphrasing the common point of view of Catholics and Orthodox toward Protestantism.

Personally I do believe that Calvinism and many forms of Protestantism are heretical. And as a possible revert to Catholicism, I can understand how they view Anglicans as heretical or Lutherans. I have great affection for both.

The Reformation took place 500 years ago. The descendents of those people that took much of Northern and Central Europe out of the Catholic Church are not responsible for their fathers’ actions and “heretic” is not a great term, you’re correct.

How about this term: 'separated brethren." Happy Advent and Merry Christmas in advance

…didn’t you just label protestants as “heretics” here? …and if so, is that helpful?

 

[josephdaniel29]

Joe, I’m not sure this is a fair characterization of Catholics as being the mom and pop religion of Protestantism. I understand the argument but am not convinced by it. The Catholic Church cannot control all heretics and their intentions and they cannot head off everyone at the pass.

It has nothing to do with controlling anything. Protestantism and Catholicism are two sides of the same coin because both Protestants and Catholics begin with the same basic presumptions, they just sometimes come to different conclusions (and sometimes not). Our recent discussion on atonement illustrates that perfectly. When it comes to atonement both groups proceed from the same basic presumption. That is why you can feel comfortable with both the Catholic and Anglican position but not so much with the Orthodox understanding.

In Christ
Joe

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Just because Catholics and Protestants have similar understandings in some areas does not mean they are two sides of the same coin. Agreement is not always tantamount to brotherhood or having a similar nature. The Atonement is one area in which there is “some” agreement between Catholics and Protestants. The Catholic Church does not teach penal substitution, for example. That is a Calvinist twist on subsitutionary atonement with more legalist interpretations since Calvin was not a clergyman but rather a lawyer. You’re correct, I totally reject the Christus Victor approach given by the Orthodox. I think it’s not only off base but totally out of touch with what Scripture, particularly Isaiah and Paul, tell us about Our Lord. I think the Orthodox are flat out wrong in that area just as I think they are wrong about Original Sin, using leavened bread, going off the deep end about the filioque, allowing three divorces, and other things. That’s why I don’t run up to Fresno and ask to get chrismated ASAP

I don’t think my ability to feel comfortable with two groups, the Catholics and Anglicans, proves they’re of the same mold. As you know, I’ve been in a struggle to find which one I belong to, but I definitely tend toward Catholicism.

I think what Orthodox do not like to talk about is how divergent Protestants and Catholics are as they are more interested in chiding Catholics as somehow the other side of the same foul coin. Things like justification through faith alone, sola scriptura, auricular confession vs. private confession, purgatory vs. no purgatory, imputation vs. infusion, escatalogical differences, “believer baptism” vs. baptism of infants, OSAS vs. salvation as a lifelong process/journey, papacy vs. individualism, apostolic succession vs. congregationalism, double predestination vs. the Catholic view, sacred art vs. the spartan, different views on sanctification, different views on justification, different views on the Eucharist, different views on Mary, different views on what constitutes a “Church,” differing understandings of the teachings of men like Augustine and Anselm, the Mass as sacrifice vs. commemoration, clerical priesthood vs. priesthood of all believers, celibacy vs. married clergy, saintly intercession vs. prayer only to Jesus, NFP vs. contraception, 7 sacraments vs. 2 or none (!!), in some cases liturgy vs. informal worship, infallibility vs. a fallible leadership, apocrypha vs. different numbers of books in the Bible, different understandings of Matthew 16:18, the list goes on and on…and yet these are two of the same coin? That’s a stretch…

It has nothing to do with controlling anything. Protestantism and Catholicism are two sides of the same coin because both Protestants and Catholics begin with the same basic presumptions, they just sometimes come to different conclusions (and sometimes not). Our recent discussion on atonement illustrates that perfectly. When it comes to atonement both groups proceed from the same basic presumption. That is why you can feel comfortable with both the Catholic and Anglican position but not so much with the Orthodox understanding.

In Christ
Joe

 

[Nine_Two]

I’m curious Gurney, and this is probably OT, and don’t mean to be rude, but how can you be comfortable with Anglicans yet see the Orthodox allowance of three marriages (not divorces) under set circumstances as a dealbreaker? Unlike Orthodox, the Anglicans allow innumerable marriages and divorces, no questions asked. How do you reconcile this?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t reconcile anything, Nine. This is one issue that I find bothersome in the Anglican and Orthodox circles. I’m not playing favorites. My Anglican diocese has a policy that any requests for divorce must go first to the rector and then to the bishop and in order to be eligible to get re-married, the bishop must consent to it. There is a process. Orthodoxy involves the bishop granting a divorce as well. So I don’t see much of a difference. I think the Catholics are correct in their strictness BUT I think the annulment process often is a euphamism with some Catholics for divorce and the way some get an annulment really seems more like a divorce since they had a valid marriage and were granted an “annulment.” I’m not happy with divorce, period and I don’t think your asking me about my position on it is rude, Nine. Your posts are rarely rude IMO.

I might also add, however, that never did I say divorce in Orthodox was a “dealbreaker.” I made it clear that the Orthodox views of the Atonement, Original Sin, and many other things bother me. Divorce was in the list. I don’t note any “deal breaker” status there with divorce

I’m curious Gurney, and this is probably OT, and don’t mean to be rude, but how can you be comfortable with Anglicans yet see the Orthodox allowance of three marriages (not divorces) under set circumstances as a dealbreaker? Unlike Orthodox, the Anglicans allow innumerable marriages and divorces, no questions asked. How do you reconcile this?

 

[Nine_Two]

I don’t reconcile anything, Nine. This is one issue that I find bothersome in the Anglican and Orthodox circles. I’m not playing favorites. My Anglican diocese has a policy that any requests for divorce must go first to the rector and then to the bishop and in order to be eligible to get re-married, the bishop must consent to it. There is a process. Orthodoxy involves the bishop granting a divorce as well. So I don’t see much of a difference. I think the Catholics are correct in their strictness BUT I think the annulment process often is a euphamism with some Catholics for divorce and the way some get an annulment really seems more like a divorce since they had a valid marriage and were granted an “annulment.” I’m not happy with divorce, period and I don’t think your asking me about my position on it is rude, Nine. Your posts are rarely rude IMO.

I might also add, however, that never did I say divorce in Orthodox was a “dealbreaker.” I made it clear that the Orthodox views of the Atonement, Original Sin, and many other things bother me. Divorce was in the list. I don’t note any “deal breaker” status there with divorce

Alright, thanks for clarifying that. I was curious since I think you’ve brought it up before.

I don’t think we completely disagree on the issue of divorce, I think the Catholic Church is too strict on the matter (discounting annulments completely, they are a huge loophole at present), but I also think an additional marriage should only be allowed in very specific cases (and keeping in mind the third marriage requires a death, something which the Catholic church automatically allows).

I think that’s going far enough off topic for now.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Well it’s the first time you and I have ever gotten off topic!

Alright, thanks for clarifying that. I was curious since I think you’ve brought it up before.

I don’t think we completely disagree on the issue of divorce, I think the Catholic Church is too strict on the matter (discounting annulments completely, they are a huge loophole at present), but I also think an additional marriage should only be allowed in very specific cases (and keeping in mind the third marriage requires a death, something which the Catholic church automatically allows).

I think that’s going far enough off topic for now.

 

[GraceSofia]

Yes, they were.

I didn’t know that. Are these the ones that went to Cyprus and caused problems about the Pope and ecumenical meetings? Where are they now? Have they gone off and started their own order or whatever? Aren’t they still living somewhere on Mt. Athos?

 

[prodromos]

I think the Orthodox are flat out wrong in that area just as I think they are wrong about Original Sin, using leavened bread, going off the deep end about the filioque, allowing three divorces, and other things.

If I could help just one person to understand that this (the bolded text) is a totally incorrect statement regarding Orthodoxy, i would feel I had achieved something of value.

The Orthodox Church will sometimes (at the bishop’s discretion) permit a person to marry a maximum of 3 times. The only likely scenario where this may be permitted is when the spouse of a person who had remarried after a divorce becomes widowed. They may be allowed by the bishop to marry a third time, but on the other hand they might not.

I personally have never heard of anyone in the Orthodox Church marrying three times, and I can count on the fingers of one hand those that I know of in the Orthodox Church who have married a second time.

 

[GraceSofia]

Either way, the Protestants are your children.

And the Muslims are yours.
.
.
.

(If you really want to play this game).

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Well you HAVE achieved something of value, prodromos And of course I figured an Orthodox Christian thrice divorced is probably an ultra rarity anyway. Gosh, “thrice divorced,” I sound like Chris Farley doing his Matt Foley, Motivational Speaker skit from Saturday Night Live!

If I could help just one person to understand that this (the bolded text) is a totally incorrect statement regarding Orthodoxy, i would feel I had achieved something of value.

The Orthodox Church will sometimes (at the bishop’s discretion) permit a person to marry a maximum of 3 times. The only likely scenario where this may be permitted is when the spouse of a person who had remarried after a divorce becomes widowed. They may be allowed by the bishop to marry a third time, but on the other hand they might not.

I personally have never heard of anyone in the Orthodox Church marrying three times, and I can count on the fingers of one hand those that I know of in the Orthodox Church who have married a second time.

 

[josephdaniel29]

Things like justification through faith alone

But you both proceed from the same basic premise regarding justification.

sola scriptura

Sola Papas.

auricular confession vs. private confession

Both still viewed as a legal transaction.

purgatory vs. no purgatory

No purgatory is simply the natural progression of the Catholic idea of temporal punishment and the so called Treasury of Merits.

imputation vs. infusion

Not even sure what that is.

papacy vs. individualism

The papacy is individualism par excellence

sacred art vs. the spartan

I would say that the two are not that far apart in practice, especially since Vatican II

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

“The Main hall was renovated from the original church and was newly designed according to Vatican II guidelines.” - St John’s Catholic Church

Looks pretty spartan to me.

different views on sanctification, different views on justification, different views on the Eucharist, different views on Mary, different views on what constitutes a “Church,” differing understandings of the teachings of men like Augustine and Anselm, the Mass as sacrifice vs. commemoration, clerical priesthood vs. priesthood of all believers, celibacy vs. married clergy, saintly intercession vs. prayer only to Jesus, NFP vs. contraception, 7 sacraments vs. 2 or none (!!), in some cases liturgy vs. informal worship, infallibility vs. a fallible leadership, apocrypha vs. different numbers of books in the Bible, different understandings of Matthew 16:18, the list goes on and on…and yet these are two of the same coin? That’s a stretch…

Most of these only go further to prove my point. No one ever said there weren’t differences. Both groups view salvation as a legal transaction. Both groups believe the Holy Spirit leads an individual; for Catholics that individual is the pope, for Protestants it’s the individual themselves. Both groups accept an external authority; for Catholics it’s the Magisterium, for Protestants it’s the Bible. The list goes on and on my brother. Perhaps it’s just more difficult to see because you are a part of it? From an Orthodox perspective it’s as clear as day.

“All Protestants are Crypto-Papists” - ** Alexis Khomiakov**

“Christians in the West, both Roman and Reformed, generally start by asking the same questions, although they may disagree about the answers. In Orthodoxy, however, it is not merely answers that are different–the questions themselves are not the same as in the West.” - Metropolitan Kallistos Ware

In Christ
Joe

 

[josephdaniel29]

If I could help just one person to understand that this (the bolded text) is a totally incorrect statement regarding Orthodoxy, i would feel I had achieved something of value.

The Orthodox Church will sometimes (at the bishop’s discretion) permit a person to marry a maximum of 3 times. The only likely scenario where this may be permitted is when the spouse of a person who had remarried after a divorce becomes widowed. They may be allowed by the bishop to marry a third time, but on the other hand they might not.

I personally have never heard of anyone in the Orthodox Church marrying three times, and I can count on the fingers of one hand those that I know of in the Orthodox Church who have married a second time.

I personally don’t know an Orthodox Christian who’s been married twice. Of course people don’t go around broadcasting that to everyone around them. The only divorced person I know in our parish had their spouse abandon them earlier this year. They have yet to remarry.

In Christ
Joe

 

[josephdaniel29]

Just because Catholics and Protestants have similar understandings in some areas does not mean they are two sides of the same coin.

And just to clarify, I don’t mean this as an insult to Catholics. It only makes sense considering both groups developed in the same cultural milieu. I would think Protestants would be far more offended than Catholics.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

With all due respect to you, Joe, my statements have in no way proven your point. You try to make bedfellows out of Protestants and Catholics. I laid out a laundry list of how they differ in HUGE ways. And you do nothing to refute what I say but just stick to the Orthodox talking points/polemics that fuel your anti-Catholic approach to discussion about the Church. I’m surprised you don’t know the difference between infusion and imputation. This is basic theology with justification and the heart of the differences between Catholicism/Orthodoxy and Protestantism? The papacy is not individualism from the Catholic perspective. It is from yours. I would counter your statement about clarity in that your reason is clouded by Orthodoxy. You have entered a system that can be, isn’t always, very much full of a chip on its shoulder toward the papacy and Catholicism. My observation in CAF is that the Catholic posters are far more charitable and full of respect for the Orthodox than is the reverse. I think you would do well to read Isaiah once in a while. It might clarify your views on the Atonement. I would also read a bit more about the papacy and all it has done to combat heresy and sin rather than enhance it.

And also, finding a picture of a bland Catholic parish is a cheesy tactic. You know full well the importance of sacred art in Catholicism and you might note that popes have done a lot to combat iconoclasm that took place in the EAST . You guys in the East did more to tear down icons than anyone else.






And also, I find your knowledge of Catholicism lacking, Joe, if you believe that Catholics are taught to follow the individual. You know full well that the pope doesn’t operate in a vacuum but rather with the college of cardinals/magisterium and often with synods, councils, committees, and rarely on his own. And you’re also aware that infallible statements that are firm and in stone are not something that comes with great regularity.

If you want to argue that the Church of the Middle Ages left itself open to the Reformation through corruption, being lax, and needing some internal reforms, then I’ll grant you that. But to imply they’re simply birds of a feather is an Orthodox polemic I don’t buy anymore than many of the other views you guys have.

If I may, and I say this charitbly, what is your purpose coming to CAF, Joe? You seem very anti-Catholic and angry at the Church, out to poke holes in her, why? I wouldn’t go on an Orthodox message board unless I were pondering conversion to Holy Orthodoxy? I remain on CAF because I’m considering reversion to the Catholic Church and greatly admire Catholicism despite my frequent questioning and disagreements at times. What is your motivation if you have such a negative view of Catholicism? I ask this respectfully.

But you both proceed from the same basic premise regarding justification.

Sola Papas.

Both still viewed as a legal transaction.

No purgatory is simply the natural progression of the Catholic idea of temporal punishment and the so called Treasury of Merits.

Not even sure what that is.

The papacy is individualism par excellence

I would say that the two are not that far apart in practice, especially since Vatican II

Looks pretty spartan to me.

Most of these only go further to prove my point. No one ever said there weren’t differences. Both groups view salvation as a legal transaction. Both groups believe the Holy Spirit leads an individual; for Catholics that individual is the pope, for Protestants it’s the individual themselves. Both groups accept an external authority; for Catholics it’s the Magisterium, for Protestants it’s the Bible. The list goes on and on my brother. Perhaps it’s just more difficult to see because you are a part of it? From an Orthodox perspective it’s as clear as day.

“All Protestants are Crypto-Papists” - ** Alexis Khomiakov**

“Christians in the West, both Roman and Reformed, generally start by asking the same questions, although they may disagree about the answers. In Orthodoxy, however, it is not merely answers that are different–the questions themselves are not the same as in the West.” - Metropolitan Kallistos Ware

In Christ
Joe

 

[josephdaniel29]

With all due respect to you, Joe, my statements have in no way proven your point. You try to make bedfellows out of Protestants and Catholics. I laid out a laundry list of how they differ in HUGE ways. And you do nothing to refute what I say but just stick to the Orthodox talking points/polemics that fuel your anti-Catholic approach to discussion about the Church. I’m surprised you don’t know the difference between infusion and imputation. This is basic theology with justification and the heart of the differences between Catholicism/Orthodoxy and Protestantism? The papacy is not individualism from the Catholic perspective. It is from yours. I would counter your statement about clarity in that your reason is clouded by Orthodoxy. You have entered a system that can be, isn’t always, very much full of a chip on its shoulder toward the papacy and Catholicism. My observation in CAF is that the Catholic posters are far more charitable and full of respect for the Orthodox than is the reverse. I think you would do well to read Isaiah once in a while. It might clarify your views on the Atonement. I would also read a bit more about the papacy and all it has done to combat heresy and sin rather than enhance it.

And also, finding a picture of a bland Catholic parish is a cheesy tactic. You know full well the importance of sacred art in Catholicism and you might note that popes have done a lot to combat iconoclasm that took place in the EAST . You guys in the East did more to tear down icons than anyone else.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_5125A0h6rSo/SkyPCqcpt5I/AAAAAAAAA1U/Qb2W6nv6V4w/P5162510.JPG

http://www.kansastravel.org/07saintmaryschurch07.JPG
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2167/2200482817_8e205ea01e_z.jpg?zz=1

And also, I find your knowledge of Catholicism lacking, Joe, if you believe that Catholics are taught to follow the individual. You know full well that the pope doesn’t operate in a vacuum but rather with the college of cardinals/magisterium and often with synods, councils, committees, and rarely on his own. And you’re also aware that infallible statements that are firm and in stone are not something that comes with great regularity.

If you want to argue that the Church of the Middle Ages left itself open to the Reformation through corruption, being lax, and needing some internal reforms, then I’ll grant you that. But to imply they’re simply birds of a feather is an Orthodox polemic I don’t buy anymore than many of the other views you guys have.

If I may, and I say this charitbly, what is your purpose coming to CAF, Joe? You seem very anti-Catholic and angry at the Church, out to poke holes in her, why? I wouldn’t go on an Orthodox message board unless I were pondering conversion to Holy Orthodoxy? I remain on CAF because I’m considering reversion to the Catholic Church and greatly admire Catholicism despite my frequent questioning and disagreements at times. What is your motivation if you have such a negative view of Catholicism? I ask this respectfully.

After all the times you’ve been called anti-Catholic on this forum I would have thought you would know better. I had a tremendous amount of respect for you. Not so much anymore.

 

[Hesychios]

I didn’t know that. Are these the ones that went to Cyprus and caused problems about the Pope and ecumenical meetings? Where are they now? Have they gone off and started their own order or whatever? Aren’t they still living somewhere on Mt. Athos?

They were evicted, that’s all I know.

The patriarchate had them removed by the Greek police. It was rather tragic because I think someone unfortunately died.

I don’t know whether any reconciled with the church, if any are still living as monks, or where they went.

This would be like me asking you where some obscure band of sedevacantists or SSPX went. These people are hard to keep tabs on, and franklly I had forgotten all about them until this thread. It’s something they have to work out for their own salvation and none of my business.

 

[bare_bones]

Other interesting remarks from the patriarch …

At Georgetown University.

Thanks for posting good speech, good reading.