I will try to be brief, I don’t wish to get entangled in minutiae.Hesychios,
I’ve been wondering what the phrase, “Orthodox in Communion with Rome” actually means in practice (if anything). Would you care to enlarge?
Hopefully,
Mick
Glory to Jesus Christ!I will try to be brief, I don’t wish to get entangled in minutiae.
Orthodoxy refers to correct belief and worship.
Orthodox Christians are not permitted to share communion with non-Orthodox. If it so happens that an Orthodox Christian…even a priest or bishop…should knowingly share communion with a person or church which teaches error that person could also be excommunicated. This is the discipline of the church altogether for nearly two thousand years. It is the knotting in the netting, so to speak (and has worked pretty well).
So if “Orthodox in Communion with Rome” did mean something, anything at all, it would mean that the church in the city of Roma was Orthodox. Which of course, it is not.
The best 12 second description of what the term would ideally represent was this declaration from Archbishop Elias Zoghby (May his Memory be Eternal!) the Melkite Archbishop of Baalbek, Lebanon. To many Eastern Catholics (like myself at one time) this man was a genuine hero.
What he is saying here is that his relationship to Rome is conditional. This is not the position of any Latin bishops that I am aware of. He is not necessarily accepting any changes to the relationship introduced in the last ten centuries.
The objective here was to establish a base from which the Melkite Archbishop could be in communion with Roma, and also Holy Orthodoxy. This declaration was submitted to the Holy Synod of the Melkite Catholic church, which overwhelmingly endorsed it. (The only two bishops who voted against this proposal were bishops in the diaspora who were appointed by the Pope of Rome, not the Patriarch of Antioch). The Melkite Patriarch went so far as to offer to resign in favor of his Orthodox counterpart if a reunion between the two Antiochian churches could be achieved!
Realistically, no Orthodox can be in communion with Rome as long as it teaches some of the errors which are attributed to it. Now this person or church may not actually believe those errors themselves, but the fact that they continue in communion with anyone teaching errors means that in effect they are saying it’s ok, or even more strongly it could seem as though they are endorsing false teaching.
So the idea that one can be in communion conditionally is a form of wishful thinking. A type of pretense.
Michael
The Church at Large — the Body of Christ
:byzsoc:
hi SSTeacher.Hesychios,
I’ve been wondering what the phrase, “Orthodox in Communion with Rome” actually means in practice (if anything). Would you care to enlarge?
Hopefully,
Mick
That is terribly confusing… so she says she’s Greek Orthodox yet contends that the Eastern Catholics are in the right? Am I missing something?
you might. where does she say that Orthodox is right?That is terribly confusing… so she says she’s Greek Orthodox yet contends that the Eastern Catholics are in the right? Am I missing something?
huh? I’m asking why someone who says they are Orthodox would seemingly claim the Orthodox position on the pseudo-council of Florence is incorrect. If one believed that why would they not then become Greek Catholic?
i think you are misunderstanding the whole thing. she is just stating what really happened. why Orthodox has not being able to come into union with the Catholic Church.
:byzsoc:Yeah- when a true unity in belief has been achieved and Rome drops certain innovations… we (Orthodox) already are “One Church” with or without Rome.i think you are misunderstanding the whole thing. she is just stating what really happened. why Orthodox has not being able to come into union with the Catholic Church.
wouldnt you desire to be One Church as before? the Catholic does.
are you really. unfortunately for you, we have news today that travels very fast.
:byzsoc:I don’t see what a scuffle between a handful of members of the Church, which was wrong and most definitely sinful, has to do with the legitimacy of the Orthodox Church’s claim to the True Church. Sex abuse scandal anyone? We are sinful human beings on both sides, luckily that has nothing to do with who holds the fullness of the truth. Don’t worry about judging me as ‘prideful’, that is God’s right, not yours.are you really. unfortunately for you, we have news today that travels very fast.
tell me about the fight in the Church in Jesuralem during Christmas time. some of the patriarchs dont even speak to each other. the CC many times has intervene.
drop your pride so you can see things the way they really are.
Patrick you seemed very angry. that is ok. we are not talking about sins. we are talking about One Church where is this union you are talking about, this One.
I’m honestly not angry, not even a little bit, my apologies if I came off that way. I’m glad you enjoyed your visit to an Orthodox church.
You have to understand that we believe we are united as we should be, in the faith and in communion with one another, we are One Church. It will be a truly great and joyous day should the Orthodox and Catholics be able to celebrate the Holy Eucharist together, but there are serious issues to be resolved, and I do not think pretending they do not exist or downplaying them is going to help, as we are responsible for preserving the Orthodox faith.This man is not “Our own people”.
You’re right. And yet the title of the piece reads,
WOW!
How perfectly deceptive of them… unless you believe they somehow were unaware he is not actually an Orthodox preist. 
do you see the title?WOW!
:byzsoc:Hesychios, I am sure that you know the whole truth about the Fr. Chrysostom. So please tell it rather than confuse people.