The Closing of "Eastern Christianity"

[Contarini]

I’m going to be a troublemaker as usual and suggest a reason why this happened.

Roman Catholics (yes, the “Roman” is relevant here–I am not talking about Eastern Catholics) are roughly in the same position with regard to Orthodox that ecumenical Protestants, particularly Anglicans, are in with regard to Catholics. In both cases, you have one side that wants to emphasize the similarities, and the other that stresses the differences. In both cases, the folks emphasizing the differences have a more uncomplicated claim to continuity with ancient tradition, and tend to be rather snooty about it. The folks emphasizing the similarities desperately want to gain recognition from the other side, and accuse the other side of a lack of charity and of a deep-rooted arrogance.

This is a very embarrassing situation for a Catholic apologetics board. Our esteemed moderator (I don’t mean that sarcastically–I disagree with this decision but I think the moderators do a great job generally) claimed that the board is being closed because it has become subject to “fights.” Well, isn’t the N-C board subject to “fights”? The problem is that the Eastern Christianity forum was supposed to show the basic unity between East and West, because that unity is essential for Catholic claims. In fact, the board demonstrated that no such unity exists. This radically undercuts the entire enterprise of Catholic apologetics. A Protestant who first encounters Catholicism and is impressed by the Fathers, the Liturgy, the Tradition in general, and then encounters Orthodoxy, has an experience of deja vu. A naive Protestant might wonder if there are in fact infinite gradations of churches, each one with more pretensions of antiquity than the last. This is why you so often find Protestants becoming first Roman Catholic, then Eastern Catholic, then Orthodox. (A Catholic priest who was my professor in grad school discouraged me from becoming Catholic in part because he was afraid I would do just this.)

If it were up to me, there would be three “non-Catholic” forums–one for the Eastern Churches not in communion with Rome (whom Rome recognizes as having valid apostolic succession), one for Trinitarian Protestants (who have valid baptism, according to Rome), and one for everyone else. But I’m not running this board–and that’s probably a good thing, apart from the obvious disqualifier that I’m not Catholic!

Edwin

 

[WanderAimlessly]

With all the flame wars going on there, it was only a matter of time. That is why I rarely posted there. There is another forum that is getting that way that I will not mention.

 

[Marina14]

I’m going to be a troublemaker as usual and suggest a reason why this happened.

Roman Catholics (yes, the “Roman” is relevant here–I am not talking about Eastern Catholics) are roughly in the same position with regard to Orthodox that ecumenical Protestants, particularly Anglicans, are in with regard to Catholics. In both cases, you have one side that wants to emphasize the similarities, and the other that stresses the differences. In both cases, the folks emphasizing the differences have a more uncomplicated claim to continuity with ancient tradition, and tend to be rather snooty about it. The folks emphasizing the similarities desperately want to gain recognition from the other side, and accuse the other side of a lack of charity and of a deep-rooted arrogance.

This is a very embarrassing situation for a Catholic apologetics board. Our esteemed moderator (I don’t mean that sarcastically–I disagree with this decision but I think the moderators do a great job generally) claimed that the board is being closed because it has become subject to “fights.” Well, isn’t the N-C board subject to “fights”? The problem is that the Eastern Christianity forum was supposed to show the basic unity between East and West, because that unity is essential for Catholic claims. In fact, the board demonstrated that no such unity exists. This radically undercuts the entire enterprise of Catholic apologetics. A Protestant who first encounters Catholicism and is impressed by the Fathers, the Liturgy, the Tradition in general, and then encounters Orthodoxy, has an experience of deja vu. A naive Protestant might wonder if there are in fact infinite gradations of churches, each one with more pretensions of antiquity than the last. This is why you so often find Protestants becoming first Roman Catholic, then Eastern Catholic, then Orthodox. (A Catholic priest who was my professor in grad school discouraged me from becoming Catholic in part because he was afraid I would do just this.)

If it were up to me, there would be three “non-Catholic” forums–one for the Eastern Churches not in communion with Rome (whom Rome recognizes as having valid apostolic succession), one for Trinitarian Protestants (who have valid baptism, according to Rome), and one for everyone else. But I’m not running this board–and that’s probably a good thing, apart from the obvious disqualifier that I’m not Catholic!

Edwin

Sounds like a great plan to me! They say that they don’t have enough “resources” to do that though.

 

[AgnosTheist]

I think its better having everything here. Its through this department that I learned that for the Orthodox the Romans have apostasized.

 

[lak611]

If it were up to me, there would be three “non-Catholic” forums–one for the Eastern Churches not in communion with Rome (whom Rome recognizes as having valid apostolic succession), one for Trinitarian Protestants (who have valid baptism, according to Rome), and one for everyone else. But I’m not running this board–and that’s probably a good thing, apart from the obvious disqualifier that I’m not Catholic!

Edwin

I suggested the same thing but was told that they do not have the resources to moderate additional forums. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=196708

 

[tomarin]

The problem is that the Eastern Christianity forum was supposed to show the basic unity between East and West, because that unity is essential for Catholic claims. In fact, the board demonstrated that no such unity exists. This radically undercuts the entire enterprise of Catholic apologetics.

hi Edwin,

at a surface level i can acknowledge and even agree with your observations. but at a deeper level i barely agree with anything you wrote at all. yes, by visiting the eastern christianity forum i experienced the cold shoulder that the orthodox posters there turn collectively toward rome as well as the outright hostility that puts paid to any notion we might have of a desire for unity on their part.

and due to that hurtful but necessary experience i can sympathize with how an ecumenical anglo-catholic (not sure if that’s redundant or not; probably not in this day and age) might feel after getting a chilly reception from strict roman catholics who dot every i and cross every t.

but don’t forget that our church is every bit as ancient and apostolic as theirs, with the added benefit of having administrative as well as doctrinal unity. isn’t it possible that they (the orthodox) could be wrong about the great schism and we could be right? i think it’s a mistake to take their claims at face value while being overly skeptical of ours.

at the end of the day, the skepticism about and lack of interest in unity on the part of the orthodox doesn’t make for an embarrassing situation or reflect poorly on us; it reflects poorly on them. as for your naive protestant who is contemplating conversion to rome or orthodoxy, well, that person would have saved himself some time if he had thought long and hard first about which church’s claims to being one, holy and catholic are more likely to be true.

i have mixed feelings about the closing of the eastern christianity board because i certainly learned a lot from it, and i have nothing against the posters who frequented it. as for why it happened, i do think you’re right insofar as the moderators underestimated the hostility of the eastern orthodox posters there to catholicism and their indifference to unity, and that this unremiting hostility does run counter to the purposes of a catholic apologetics website.

but ultimately perhaps they were guests here who became a little too comfortable taking their hosts’ hospitality for granted.

 

[zerocrossing]

but don’t forget that our church is every bit as ancient and apostolic as theirs, with the added benefit of having administrative as well as doctrinal unity. isn’t it possible that they (the orthodox) could be wrong about the great schism and we could be right? i think it’s a mistake to take their claims at face value while being overly skeptical of ours.

at the end of the day, the skepticism about and lack of interest in unity on the part of the orthodox doesn’t make for an embarrassing situation or reflect poorly on us; it reflects poorly on them.

I rarely ventured to the Eastern Christianity boards because I was under no illusions about EO desires for unity. At one point in my faith journey, I left the Catholic Church for the EO church. During that time, I heard things from EOs about the Catholic Church that sounded like they could have come from Jack Chick comic books. I’m talking serious conspiracy stuff about the Pope and the Jesuits.

Most EOs regard Catholics as apostate heretics. They do not regard the Catholic Church as a valid church or the Pope as a valid successor of Peter. Learning this was definitely culture shock for me because Catholics tend to regard Eastern Orthodoxy as a sibling to Catholicism. That regard is not reciprocal. And I’m glad that more Catholics are finding that out.

 

[Marina14]

They do not regard the Catholic Church as a valid church or the Pope as a valid successor of Peter.

Orthodox Christian Churches do recognize the Pope as a valid successor of Peter, just that in earlier centuries the Catholics fell into heresy and split themselves off from the Church Jesus Himself established.

Our understanding of the role of Peter and his successors is **different **than Catholic understanding; however, the historical succession of Peter’s successors have never been questioned.

Please don’t misrepresent the Orthodox views/teachings. That doesn’t help.

 

[Joab_Anias]

I rarely ventured to the Eastern Christianity boards because I was under no illusions about EO desires for unity. At one point in my faith journey, I left the Catholic Church for the EO church. During that time, I heard things from EOs about the Catholic Church that sounded like they could have come from Jack Chick comic books. I’m talking serious conspiracy stuff about the Pope and the Jesuits.

Most EOs regard Catholics as apostate heretics. They do not regard the Catholic Church as a valid church or the Pope as a valid successor of Peter. Learning this was definitely culture shock for me because Catholics tend to regard Eastern Orthodoxy as a sibling to Catholicism. That regard is not reciprocal. And I’m glad that more Catholics are finding that out.

[SIGN]Amen[/SIGN]

I would also like to add or ask, isn’t the very title and object of this thread in violation of rule:

• 9.) Debating moderator action, including discussing, disputing, or speculating as to why a member’s posting privileges were restricted, why posted messages were edited or deleted, or why threads were closed or removed from public fora.​

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

Please don’t misrepresent the Orthodox views/teachings. That doesn’t help.

Its not a misrepresentiation if its the general concensus.

I get the exact same impression that it is.

Peace.

 

[Marina14]

Its not a misrepresentiation if its the general concensus.

I get the exact same impression that it is.

Peace.

Your impression is dead wrong…you ought to visit Orthodox Churches and Orthodox Monasteries through out the country and speak to them about how they view the Roman See.

Or just view the documents regarding this at: www.scoba.us - check out the Official Statements!

 

[Prometheum_x]

[sign]Amen[/sign]

I would also like to add or ask, isn’t the very title and object of this thread in violation of rule:

• 9.) Debating moderator action, including discussing, disputing, or speculating as to why a member’s posting privileges were restricted, why posted messages were edited or deleted, or why threads were closed or removed from public fora.​

Peace.

Whether this is a significant difference or not, I don’t know, but the difference in this case is that we are discussing a change in the forum structure, which isn’t one of the three types of actions listed above. As well, the moderators a) have made several posts on this subject explaining their reasoning and b) are well aware that this change is being discussed but haven’t posted anything asking us to stop. But, let’s not debate whether or not this is a permitted debate. . . that would be a most uninteresting conversation!

Tag: EOOO

 

[wynd]

Most EOs regard Catholics as apostate heretics. They do not regard the Catholic Church as a valid church or the Pope as a valid successor of Peter. Learning this was definitely culture shock for me because Catholics tend to regard Eastern Orthodoxy as a sibling to Catholicism. That regard is not reciprocal. And I’m glad that more Catholics are finding that out.

Like Edwin said in the first post of this thread, this is exactly how Anglicans or other Protestants feel when told by Catholics in no uncertain terms that their orders aren’t valid and their religion is fake. Does that make the Catholic position “polemical” or “offensive?” It’s the exact same thing except the shoe is on the other foot now.

 

[cascherman]

Like Edwin said in the first post of this thread, this is exactly how Anglicans or other Protestants feel when told by Catholics in no uncertain terms that their orders aren’t valid and their religion is fake. Does that make the Catholic position “polemical” or “offensive?” It’s the exact same thing except the shoe is on the other foot now.

I’ve never been told by a protestant that I am his Christian brother… at least any protestant that I have verbally talked to.

but I have been told items like, your pope is the antichrist and your church is the work of satan. The official teaching of the church I left was that the pope is the antichrist, Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.

So, I disagree that protestants feel the same way, but I can see Anglicans being closer to that notion.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

and due to that hurtful but necessary experience i can sympathize with how an ecumenical anglo-catholic (not sure if that’s redundant or not; probably not in this day and age) might feel after getting a chilly reception from strict roman catholics who dot every i and cross every t.

but don’t forget that our church is every bit as ancient and apostolic as theirs, with the added benefit of having administrative as well as doctrinal unity. isn’t it possible that they (the orthodox) could be wrong about the great schism and we could be right? i think it’s a mistake to take their claims at face value while being overly skeptical of ours.

And could the Protestants be right about the Reformation?

at the end of the day, the skepticism about and lack of interest in unity on the part of the orthodox doesn’t make for an embarrassing situation or reflect poorly on us; it reflects poorly on them. as for your naive protestant who is contemplating conversion to rome or orthodoxy, well, that person would have saved himself some time if he had thought long and hard first about which church’s claims to being one, holy and catholic are more likely to be true.

How about that One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church that recites that Creed in the original form?

 

[Mannyfit75]

And could the Protestants be right about the Reformation?

They were wrong to go about it.

How about that One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church that recites that Creed in the original form?

The filioque may not be said in Eastern Rite Catholic Church according to current Code of Canon Law. The filioque clause was not condemned as a heretic by any Church Council. There was Patriarch of Constantinople, who did. He didn’t think it was right for Rome to add anything to Creed.

 

[Joab_Anias]

Your impression is dead wrong…you ought to visit Orthodox Churches and Orthodox Monasteries through out the country and speak to them about how they view the Roman See.

Or just view the documents regarding this at: www.scoba.us - check out the Official Statements!

I will visit Othodox Catholic Churches who permit me communion with them.

I don’t think my impression of the example given here by those who are now absent is incorrect. I am sure it hardly applies to the truly ecumenical Orthodox non-catholics but I believe its evident that they are in the minority.

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

And could the Protestants be right about the Reformation?

Reform and renewal is ongoing. To turn it into revolt or schism on the other hand is a grave error.

How about that One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church that recites that Creed in the original form?

Even some protestant Churches recite the filoque.

Peace.

 

[Irenicist]

Orthodox Christian Churches do recognize the Pope as a valid successor of Peter, just that in earlier centuries the Catholics fell into heresy and split themselves off from the Church Jesus Himself established.

Our understanding of the role of Peter and his successors is **different **than Catholic understanding; however, the historical succession of Peter’s successors have never been questioned.

Please don’t misrepresent the Orthodox views/teachings. That doesn’t help.

With all due respect to your status as Orthodox, not all members of your communion now believe or have believed in the past that the Western Church “fell into heresy”. For many, we are in schism because of differing ecclesiological practices and jurisdictional claims. The views you are expressing here are typical of what I would describe as anti-Catholic Orthodox polemics, and why I and others eventually withdrew from the Eastern Christianity Forum where no other Orthodox voice ever seemed to manifest itself.

Your view is a common one, but it isn’t normative in the East, nor is it charitable or responsible to present it as such. Which Orthodox liturgy condemns “the heresies of the West”? What pan-Orthodox council has ever levied the charge of “heresy” at the West. At most you will find claims that “the West departed from the fullness of the orthodox faith”.

I would invite you to identify even one specifically Catholic belief that cannot be demonstrated as having been publicly espoused by one or more Church Father with whom his counterparts in the East were content to maintain communion. While failure to do so does not establish that such beliefs should bind all, or are even necessarily correct, it does tends to undermine the suggestion that such differences constitute “heresy” or are otherwise inherently communion-breaking.

I am sure you are a person of good faith, and are merely repeating what you have been told. But there is a danger here of treating highly tendentious polemical opinions and taunts as if they were established doctrinal truths.

Irenicist

 

[Joab_Anias]

Whether this is a significant difference or not, I don’t know, but the difference in this case is that we are discussing a change in the forum structure, which isn’t one of the three types of actions listed above. As well, the moderators a) have made several posts on this subject explaining their reasoning and b) are well aware that this change is being discussed but haven’t posted anything asking us to stop. But, let’s not debate whether or not this is a permitted debate. . . that would be a most uninteresting conversation!

Just asking.

Peace.