D
dzheremi
Guest
Yeah, y’know…so that I can feel like I didn’t really go anywhere.
What…you mean church ISN’T supposed to bend itself to my desires? :
What…you mean church ISN’T supposed to bend itself to my desires? :
- Status
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Isn’t it at least theoretically possible that there are lot people wrong in there thinking out here?
To be fair to everyone I’m 100% positive the Poisonous Snake handlers who believe if the snake doesn’t bite them the Holy Spirit is in them? Facinating Christian denomination, want to attend a meeting together this week
Let me speak about growing up Catholic, I have never heard a bad word about Protestants or anyone else for that matter. Now there might be some bad-rapping going on. But I didn’t hear that. I could be honest and tell what I do remember. I could remember the Sister’s non-verbal expressions of disapproval, on rare occasions. But dialogue? Never.
GT
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
See now me speaking strickly from your discription I would probly feel more comfortable there than anywhere. For the simple fact of being raised in the Polish church. That is if I didn’t believe in a Universal Church concept through the Mystical body of Jesus Christ.Coptic Christianity is definitely a little more foreign than the Orthodoxy I’ve been looking into. The Orthodox parish I’ve visited is Serbian BUT there are hardly any Serbs there! It has Russians, Ukrainians, Anglos like me, and it actually has more converts from Protestantism and Catholicism than it does cradle Orthodox. That’s what’s kind of neat about it. But being a cradle Catholic, I still feel out of place and the fact that the parish owes its roots to Serbia and a Slavic part of the world, I also feel like “what the heck am I doing?” I also question my mindset sometimes in that NOBODY I know is concerned about this theology, soteriology, and faith of the Early Fathers. Most people I know just belong to their church, try their best, and pray hard loving the Lord. Me, I’m on this constant search, seeking, reading, studying, dialoguing with folks like you and the other posters here, and just begging God to lead me to the right spot. Orthodoxy is REALLY foreign to my neck of the woods so if I did choose to get chrismated, IMO, that is really really something that 9 out of 10 people I know would say, “huh?” to
GT
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
I guess many people believe, many Christian Churchs can exist in Gods world. And the Burger King, McDonalds theory will remain in effect for another what, 500-1000 years?
Personally I wouldn’t care how the worship went as I believe its correct now, looked, what race, ethnic backgrounds attended, doesn’t matter. Is the Holy Spirit not in the CC?
Only thing that matters is exactly what Pilate said to Christ, “What is Truth”?
While looking the Sovereign Truth in the eye? He did see it, missed it completely. So it would be no surprize that man has a struggle to see it also.
Peters Chair, remains, as does Scripture and History, Archaeology which aligns with Geography. The Apostolic Succession remains intact. Likes and Dislikes?
That sounds like kids going to a Prom. What they first do is look for the “flaws” but overlook all that is correct and Good. Thats how I see that people view the Catholic Church. Has no bearing on Truth, on the Keys to the Kingdom and the power to bind and lose.
There can only be one Truth in regards to the Church which Jesus Christ built upon the Apostles. Two is one to many, 100’s I won’t even comment on. From that point we can draw comparisons to Islam. So maybe we should.
We can continue to think…“somehow” everything will work out great. It always does right, in the Land of ther Free? How quickly we forget WW-II and how close we came to losing this in a no-quarter war. Satan put one hell of a plan together. Let me ask you something, do you think his plan won’t be even better this time?
May God have Mercy on Us, Gary
Personally I wouldn’t care how the worship went as I believe its correct now, looked, what race, ethnic backgrounds attended, doesn’t matter. Is the Holy Spirit not in the CC?
Only thing that matters is exactly what Pilate said to Christ, “What is Truth”?
While looking the Sovereign Truth in the eye? He did see it, missed it completely. So it would be no surprize that man has a struggle to see it also.
Peters Chair, remains, as does Scripture and History, Archaeology which aligns with Geography. The Apostolic Succession remains intact. Likes and Dislikes?
That sounds like kids going to a Prom. What they first do is look for the “flaws” but overlook all that is correct and Good. Thats how I see that people view the Catholic Church. Has no bearing on Truth, on the Keys to the Kingdom and the power to bind and lose.
There can only be one Truth in regards to the Church which Jesus Christ built upon the Apostles. Two is one to many, 100’s I won’t even comment on. From that point we can draw comparisons to Islam. So maybe we should.
We can continue to think…“somehow” everything will work out great. It always does right, in the Land of ther Free? How quickly we forget WW-II and how close we came to losing this in a no-quarter war. Satan put one hell of a plan together. Let me ask you something, do you think his plan won’t be even better this time?
May God have Mercy on Us, Gary
H
Harpazo
Guest
Try converting to Orthodox in the Bible Belt. “You’re Orthodox? Oh you’re Jewish?”Coptic Christianity is definitely a little more foreign than the Orthodoxy I’ve been looking into. The Orthodox parish I’ve visited is Serbian BUT there are hardly any Serbs there! It has Russians, Ukrainians, Anglos like me, and it actually has more converts from Protestantism and Catholicism than it does cradle Orthodox. That’s what’s kind of neat about it. But being a cradle Catholic, I still feel out of place and the fact that the parish owes its roots to Serbia and a Slavic part of the world, I also feel like “what the heck am I doing?” I also question my mindset sometimes in that NOBODY I know is concerned about this theology, soteriology, and faith of the Early Fathers. Most people I know just belong to their church, try their best, and pray hard loving the Lord. Me, I’m on this constant search, seeking, reading, studying, dialoguing with folks like you and the other posters here, and just begging God to lead me to the right spot. Orthodoxy is REALLY foreign to my neck of the woods so if I did choose to get chrismated, IMO, that is really really something that 9 out of 10 people I know would say, “huh?” to
In Christ,
Andrew
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Try being anything in the Bible Belt but Protestant.
Its slowly changing, they still believe the US ends in Virginia their. Again it a matter of people interacting. I lived in the South for years. Left with some great friends.
GT
Its slowly changing, they still believe the US ends in Virginia their. Again it a matter of people interacting. I lived in the South for years. Left with some great friends.
GT
H
Hesychios
Guest
My father was Polish, and I was baptized in a totally ethnic Polish parish in Chicago.
But I finished growing up in the suburbs, with Irish and German priests, and I forgot what little Polish I ever learned. After the new flood of immigrants came in during the '90s a whole new Polish parish was set up just a few miles from my home. I went to check it out but I did not fit in at all, I was very uncomfortable and somehow it seemed like they wanted it that way.
This was a slight contrast to most ethnic parishes I have visited (Mexican, African American, Ukrainian), where they mostly ignore the visitor.
I have been to two Serbian parishes in Chicago, where most of the parishioners are indeed from Serbia. They were pleasant enough but they were not set up for Anglophones at all. I did not feel unwelcome, just mostly ignored, almost exactly the same way I have felt in a Mexican parish.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Yes, mystically and sacramentally. If you remove the secular aspects that have caused a tear (schism) in the unity, what you have remaining is “No man can put asunder what God has joined together”.So, then, you’re now saying Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism are the same? . .
So long as pride, misunderstandings, combined with negative protests without full understanding towards what God has built in his Catholic Church, supported by secular powers to hinder unity. This small schism between “Some” Orthodox communities prevents full communion with the Pope, and what some posters fail to realize these Orthodox communities are also out of full communion with the world wide apostolic successors who never seperated themselves from the Popes since apostolic times from both East and West Catholic Church communities.
A word of caution here, when you use the Word Eastern Orthodoxy loosely here, you are including many Eastern Church’s who never left their full communion with the Popes. It may be more clear to idenitfy these Orthodox who refuse communion with the Popes and the rest of the bishops world wide united to the pope, specifically or Orthodox not in full communion with the pope.
S
searn77
Guest
To be completely honest here, and I mean this with no disrespect, you are the only person I have ever seen in an Orthodox or Catholic forum who thinks that “Eastern Orthodox” refers to Eastern Catholics as well. I’ve seen Eastern Catholics refer to themselves as “Orthodox in communion with Rome,” but whenever someone uses the term “Eastern Orthodox” they always refer to the Orthodox Church bodies that are not in communion with Rome, and generally being the Orthodox Churches that are in communion with Constantinople and Moscow.
And I understand that most, if not all, Eastern Catholics consider themselves fully Orthodox. But when someone uses the term “Eastern Orthodox” they are not referring to Eastern Catholics.
G
gurneyhalleck1
Guest
LOL! When I tell people I’m looking into Orthodoxy they look at me like I dressed up like a Klingon at a Star Trek convention. In these parts you’re either Baptist, Assembly of God, non-denominational or Catholic. Orthodoxy? huh?
Try converting to Orthodox in the Bible Belt. “You’re Orthodox? Oh you’re Jewish?”
In Christ,
Andrew
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Doubting Thomas said the same things along those lines, he refused to believe in the resurrection, until Jesus revealed himself.
Once man humbly removes himself from the equation of “schism” and allow the Holy Spirit to teach and REMIND them, what Jesus revealed to them. Then man will realize “no man can put asunder what God has joined together”.
Nothing is impossible for God.
And Peter denied Jesus three times in front of witnesses, who saw him walk and follow Jesus. Did this prevent the begotten Son from his passion and resurrection? Some things are left better off in the hands of God not men to settle.
Jesus has built his Church on Peter, Jesus gave the keys to Peter, Jesus promised never to leave him alone, Jesus commanded Peter to tend, feed His flock until He returns, Jesus gave Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who protests what God joined together in Jesus Christ has built, protests against God not the Pope.
Any “body” logically without a visible head becomes defective. Let’s keep the popes quotes in perspective.
This is the first time I have ever heard of any notion, the Anglican unity back home makes the impression for the same about the Orthodox who refuse communion with the Popes. The Orthodox I agree; are all together different by Catholic standards different from Anglicans, but not from Catholics as far as validity is concerned. It is good that Orthodoxy remain Orthodoxy, so that the Pope does not become overburdened in calling back his western separated brethren back to the faith, at the same time working to call the Orthodox back to the faith as one. That is why Jesus named him “Rock”, so as to withstand all ages, unchanged until the resurrection.
To drop “Infallibility” from Church doctrine is to drop the Holy Spirit, 2000 years of unchanged Apostolic Catholic faith, drop any defeated heresies, drop the bible books as uninspired of God etc… Infallibility protects the revelations of Jesus Christ and His teachings from ever being taught in error from any pope and or validated Church council.For reunion to happen the pope would have to drop the idea of infallibility and universal supremacy and admit to being the Coryphaeus again, the primacy of honor and respect without the all-encompassing and sweeping powers claimed post schism. The filioque would have to be dropped and I’m sure the Orthodox would be comforted by the fact that the Catholic Church has gotten strict with crack-downs on liturgical abuse. The liturgical ballet dancers and the wild rainbow-colored robes, the relaxed atmosphere and poor wording in the liturgy, this would need to disappear. There would need to be strong re-orientation to the past and tradition and a return to the mindset of pre-Vatican II. Do all these things and then I’d say the East might want a reunion!
Man can try to drop infallibility, but he is deceiving himself, it will never happen. Infallibility has been around since Pentecost. Infallibility defeats any new wind of doctrine of man which tries to remove the faithful from Christ’s hand, but no one can snatch not one of these little ones from the Father’s hand, infallibility is the living guarantee that Jesus has never left his Church.
H
Harpazo
Guest
Orthodox? Is that a type of doctor?LOL! When I tell people I’m looking into Orthodoxy they look at me like I dressed up like a Klingon at a Star Trek convention. In these parts you’re either Baptist, Assembly of God, non-denominational or Catholic. Orthodoxy? huh?
In Christ,
Andrew
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Thank you; your comment lends clarification to my point. So as not to confuse this dialogue for clarification; The poster I addressed did not reference Eastern Catholics to Eastern Orthodox. The point I responded to was not to generalize and place "all Eastern Orthodox to include Eastern Catholics, Orthodox Catholics in the East who remain heretics. ("A word of caution here, when you use the Word Eastern Orthodoxy **loosely **here, you are including many Eastern Church’s who never left their full communion with the Popes.)
Can you reveal here how you distinguish the Orthodox Church’s in heresy residing in the East from the Orthodox Church who refuse communion with the pope from the East? Or do you group heterodox Orthodox with Orthodox as all Eastern Orthodox Church’s?. I recommended to the poster to name them specifically?
S
searn77
Guest
I’m not sure if I understand you correctly but I’ll try to clarify my statement.
When someone uses the term “Eastern Orthodox” they usually mean those Orthodox Church bodies who are in communion with the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Moscow, Antioch, etc. Although I personally regard myself as Eastern Orthodox, I understand that referring to myself as Eastern Orthodox would likely cause confusion as I am not in communion with any of these Patriarchates. So as not to cause confusion I refer to myself as “Orthodox Old Calendarist”. Eastern Catholics may consider themselves to be fully “Eastern Orthodox” as well, but I’ve never heard them call themselves “Eastern Orthodox” because, as I said above, the term “Eastern Orthodox” generally refers to those Churches in communion with the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Moscow, etc. Some Eastern Catholics refer to themselves as “Orthodox in communion with Rome” though. Although there is a dispute about using this phrase, this phrase “Orthodox in communion with Rome” at least allows people to understand that it refers to those Eastern Churches who are united with Rome.
Then there are the “Oriental Orthodox” or “Non-Chalcedonian Orthodox” which includes the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahdo Church, and the rest of the Churches in communion with them.
At least, from my experiences, this has generally been the rule on who is regarded as Eastern Orthodox and who is regarded as Oriental Orthodox or Non-Chalcedonian Orthodox.
I hope I understood your question correctly as I wasn’t too sure on if I was answering you correctly or not.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Thank you for your post, it introduces here the vast area of Orthodoxy that can be easily confused. There is much much more to add to you commentary in viewing the differences between “Eastern Catholics” or Eastern Rite Catholics which is the more accepted term in scholar writings and even this term does not do it justice because these do not include the Milanese and Mozarabic and Italo Greek are not considered Eastern Catholics but in union with Rome.I’m not sure if I understand you correctly but I’ll try to clarify my statement.
When someone uses the term “Eastern Orthodox” they usually mean those Orthodox Church bodies who are in communion with the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Moscow, Antioch, etc. Although I personally regard myself as Eastern Orthodox, I understand that referring to myself as Eastern Orthodox would likely cause confusion as I am not in communion with any of these Patriarchates. So as not to cause confusion I refer to myself as “Orthodox Old Calendarist”. Eastern Catholics may consider themselves to be fully “Eastern Orthodox” as well, but I’ve never heard them call themselves “Eastern Orthodox” because, as I said above, the term “Eastern Orthodox” generally refers to those Churches in communion with the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Moscow, etc. Some Eastern Catholics refer to themselves as “Orthodox in communion with Rome” though. Although there is a dispute about using this phrase, this phrase “Orthodox in communion with Rome” at least allows people to understand that it refers to those Eastern Churches who are united with Rome.
Then there are the “Oriental Orthodox” or “Non-Chalcedonian Orthodox” which includes the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahdo Church, and the rest of the Churches in communion with them.
At least, from my experiences, this has generally been the rule on who is regarded as Eastern Orthodox and who is regarded as Oriental Orthodox or Non-Chalcedonian Orthodox.
I hope I understood your question correctly as I wasn’t too sure on if I was answering you correctly or not.
Orthodoxy took its original name out of a Church council so as to separate those Catholics in the East holding to the apostolic teachings adopting the term “Orthodox” from those Catholics in the East who mirrored their liturgies, cultures and languages who were teaching “Heterodoxy”.
Today these Aramaic, Greek, Egyptian…Catholics in the East have adopted the term “Orthodoxy” to their names, lending more confusion today, in topics of discussion if one is not careful in indentifying the correct community.
These are too numerous to list here, but it should also be noted, as you mentioned, many of these “Orthodox” communities are not in communion with one another, adding more confusion to the term “Orthodox” today. Yet are holding to the term “Orthodox”.
Your commentary clarifies some aspects of Orthodoxy that many including myself are not aware of this complexity of diversed communities, such as yours “Orthodox Old Calendarist”.
I am glad you brought this up, because I once thought the “Orthodox” church was all one church apart from the West, when this was never the case. Orthodoxy consists of many Catholic Church’s who are not in communion with one another, shrinking and diversifying the Orthodox Church into many small communities apart from one another.
That is why when discussing these matters with western protestants, IMHO they tend to group all the Catholics stemming from the Eastern hemisphere as all belonging to the One Orthodox Church community, which is never the case.
In the West, we have many diversified communities as does the East in languages, culture and geography, but all of our bishops remain united to one head the bishop of Rome who sits in Peter’s chair as Pope.
Peace be with you
S
searn77
Guest
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the mozarabic rite a western rite? So they would not be considered Eastern Catholic anyways.
I’m not sure who you are referring to with the “Milanese.” Who are they?
And the Italo-Greek Catholic Church is considered to be an Eastern Catholic Church. If I’m not mistaken (which I could very well be), this is one of the Eastern Catholic Churches that is believed to have always been in communion with Rome. But even so, they are still an Eastern Catholic Church.
B
Bluegoat
Guest
I’ve met a few Orthodox, online, not IRL, that were really interested in English, Welsh, Scottish, or Irish Orthodoxy. Most were EO and went to an Eastern liturgy, but they were looking really closely at the pre-schism Church in those places to draw personal connections and inspiration. There is some really interesting early Christian poetry and saints and stuff that comes out of the UK and Ireland, I’ve seen some really nice icons even of very Western saints.Well the jury is out for sure. I’m looking into it all. The DL felt foreign and weird the first time I went to it; the second time it felt very impressive in many ways. My wife really took to it. I think there are a lot of preconceived notions that growing up in the West has given me. I can’t imagine with my Irish, German, British history coursing through my veins, with the Protestant and Catholic heritage of my forefathers, all of a sudden I shift to the Orthodoxy of the East. I guess my blood rebels at the thought to some degree…
S
searn77
Guest
If you’re interested, here’s a website that shows examples of icons of many western saints that are recognized by the Orthodox:
allmercifulsavior.com/icons/Western.html
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
I mention these because from their history which can cause some confusion between those Eastern rite Catholics and Western rite Catholics. The Mozarabic and Milanese (See Catholic Encyclopedia: Milan), rites do not belong to the Roman Rite, so should they be considered Eastern Catholic’s? If we based it on rites, they are, but because in the West, rite does not always follow patriarchate, they are not considered Eastern Catholics;
The “Gallican” church has her own rite, yet; has always been part of the Roman Patriarchate just as “Toledo”. If we followed this form the Italo-Greek Catholic Church is no longer an Eastern Catholic church because she belongs to the Roman Patriarchate, yet she keeps to her Byzantine rite. These are an exception to the general rule of distinguishing Eastern rite Catholics. Which can cause confusion if one generalizes to geography to determine between the Eastern Rite Catholics and Western Catholics.
I think the importance to this discussion today is that it is difficult to generalize Orthodox church as one being independent from Rome, when this is not the case, because as you stated the Eastern Catholics apply this term of Orthodoxy to themselves as do those Orthodox church holding to heterodox teachings. Even one applies the term Eastern Rite Catholics can cause confusion. That is why I respectfully asked for clarfication and specifics be named during discussion, once the specific community is identified from the beginning, then the term Eastern (rite) Catholics or Orthodox may apply.
This applies to the Latin Rite also, for it was not labeled as Roman Catholic Church until the reformation so as to separate the Latin Rite from Protestants.
D
dzheremi
Guest
Gabriel, I do not know where you are getting your information, but both the Mozarabic and Milanese (Ambrosian) rites are Western. They differ from the “standard” Latin or Roman rite, but are not considered Eastern just because they are not the exact same as the Latin rite as it is commonly practiced. The Latin church used to have more diverse rites within it, but some were suppressed at various points in history. Please see the following summaries:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozarabic_Rite
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrosian_Rite
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozarabic_Rite
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrosian_Rite
- Status