Stephen168
New member
It was mutual and mutually rescinded in 1965
The Orthodox Christian Church existed before St. Peter established his 2nd "See" in Rome.
- Status
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
(1) The issue over the filioque has been more or less resolved adequately for most orthodox.
(2) The issue of Petrine authority is what remains.
(3) While most Orthodox recognize Petrine authority as merely “first among equals” the history of the Church (i.e. Tradition) from the Catholic perspective shows substantial authority for true Petrine authority over the remaining apostolic bishoprics. I’m sure you see it differently. I’m not going to try to convince you to change your view in this thread. I’m simply pointing out that educated and intelligent men and women of good faith on both sides of the fence see the issue to be in their favor.
(4) If you really think that the Orthodox Church is not hurt by the division of Christianity, then you are simply burying your head in the sand. The schism is the worst thing to happen to christian unity in the history of the Church, with the reformation coming in second. And the schism persists primarily because of only the Petrine authority issue.
The “Orthodox Church” is not “missing a lung” she is THE missing lung. I’m not suggesting that she is defective (deformed) in her doctrine, only that she is incomplete while the East and West are separated.
Just my two cents on the matter.
Peace,
-Robert
S
StMarina303ad
Guest
Council of Nicea and the 1st Council of Constantinople.
S
StMarina303ad
Guest
(1) The issue over the filioque has been more or less resolved adequately for most orthodox.
Right, the Orthodox continue to understand the eternally the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father and into time and creation He comes to us, creatures, through the Son (& visa versa when it comes to Jesus entering into the womb of the Theotokos after the Holy Spirit overshadowed her). The Catholics continue to fail to understand as a whole, surely there are some that do understand, that the Holy Spirit does not proceed eternally from both the Father and the Son, but only eternally from the Father.
(2) The issue of Petrine authority is what remains.
It is one of the bigger issues, but it is certainly, not the only issue.
(3) While most Orthodox recognize Petrine authority as merely “first among equals” the history of the Church (i.e. Tradition) from the Catholic perspective shows substantial authority for true Petrine authority over the remaining apostolic bishoprics. I’m sure you see it differently. I’m not going to try to convince you to change your view in this thread. I’m simply pointing out that educated and intelligent men and women of good faith on both sides of the fence see the issue to be in their favor.
The Pope was (past tense) recognized as the “first among equals”; however, since the Church of Rome left Orthodoxy that is no longer the case. Most Orthodox assume that if reunion ever happens, Rome would again be recognized as “first among equals”. But currently by default, that place has transferred to Constantinople.
(4) If you really think that the Orthodox Church is not hurt by the division of Christianity, then you are simply burying your head in the sand. The schism is the worst thing to happen to christian unity in the history of the Church, with the reformation coming in second. And the schism persists primarily because of only the Petrine authority issue.
The Orthodox Church has gone on since the split, remaining faithful to all the Tradition and only to the Tradition which the Apostles handed down to us. We have venerable Saints who literally shine with the Uncreated Light of the Most Holy Trinity so brightly people can’t look at them - even while still living here on Earth and Martyrs, this has never been said of any of the Catholic Church’s Saints since the division. Pope John Paul II wrote an Encyclical about how much the Roman Catholic Church has lost since the division, the wealth of spirituality, etc. which the Orthodox Churches have maintained. Per his encyclical: Light of the East (I believe is the name, it’s at home at the moment), he clearly wanted to get back what was lost. Meanwhile, the Orthodox Church hasn’t lost anything, we are still the Church entire. We would love to see all of Christianity to come back to the entire deposit of Faith, Catholics and Protestants alike! Come back home!
The “Orthodox Church” is not “missing a lung” she is THE missing lung. I’m not suggesting that she is defective (deformed) in her doctrine, only that she is incomplete while the East and West are separated.
That is a fallacy. Come visit and participate in the Life of the Orthodox Church and you will then know clearly, we are WHOLE.
Just my two cents on the matter.
If I had a nickel on this matter, it would be because I stole from my daughter’s piggy bank and I’m nicer than that - most of the time
Peace to you also!
Peace,
-Robert
A
adstrinity
Guest
Rome represented at Nicea. Both were Catholic Councils, though.
S
StMarina303ad
Guest
My point was that the Roman Catholic Church accepted them and their decisions, decrees and canons, even though one of them she failed to have any of her Bishops attend. The Church of Rome was certainly invited to each of the Councils which were called together by the Roman Emperor.
The Church at the time included the terms Catholic and Orthodox interchangably - they included all the Churches including the Patriarchates of: Rome, Constantinople (Byzantium), Alexandria, Antioch and Jeruselem and the Independent Churches of Greece and Cyprus and the like. Rome did not seperate herself from the rest of these Churches until *after *the Church was already 1,000 years old.
- Status