Unstructured Thread...

[Mickey]

In my researching of The Orthodox Church, I’ve come to find that those that there is a consensus about The Orthodox Church…and that is, that they cannot prove their claims and that they cannot answer questions posed to them.

I know it is difficult for you to hear the truth. All your questions have been answered and it hurts when you begin to see the gaps in your own theology. Keep studying about Holy Orthodoxy. You will see the beauty of Her truth and wisdom. You will see the true Church of the first Christians. You will see the 2000 year old Church. You will see the one, holy ,catholic and apostolic Church–the Holy Orthodox Church.

Right now you are very uninformed. But it seems like you are still young–you have time.

 

[2ndGen]

LOL! That’s a good one!

 

[2ndGen]

All your questions have been answered and it hurts when you begin to see the gaps in your own theology.

 

[wisdomseeker]

It is an innovation. There was no such doctrine when the Churches were one.

could be because they believed and there was no question about it?
may the idea came later because the Holy Spirit wanted them to know this?
we cannot possibly expect that everything was said and done in one day.
Jesus himself said: there is much to be said. I will send a conforter who will guide you into all truth.
we know that the Church had to be formed first over time. then other things would be revealed. if things are revealed to the Roman church and not to others, then we can rest assure that Jesus is with this Church.

 

[2ndGen]

me too.
it takes a true church to do such a thing. when so many has done so much evil to our Church no one has ever apologized for anything and i dont expect them to.

I wonder if any of their “popes”, sorry, “patriarchs” ever accepted responsibility for the atrocities they commited against Muslims and Catholics in Kosovo just 16 years ago?

 

[2ndGen]

could be because they believed and there was no question about it?
may the idea came later because the Holy Spirit wanted them to know this?
we cannot possibly expect that everything was said and done in one day.
Jesus himself said: there is much to be said. I will send a conforter who will guide you into all truth.
we know that the Church had to be formed first over time. then other things would be revealed. if things are revealed to the Roman church and not to others, then we can rest assure that Jesus is with this Church.

Trust me, “innovation” is an “innovation” in their terminology.

It’s their buzzword for Christian revelation.

Funny, they call themselves the origingal Church, yet they have “Catholic” Bibles.

Duh!?!

The original Christian Church had no Bible.

Quintesential “have your cake and eat it too” believers.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I wonder if any of their “popes”, sorry, “patriarchs” ever accepted responsibility for the atrocities they commited against Muslims and Catholics in Kosovo just 16 years ago?

why should they? only the True Church called by the True God can do things that are perfect such as the sacrifice of humility and ask forgiveness not because they are guilt but for the sake of all mankind.

 

[Mickey]

Hi wisdomseeker,

I would like to wish you well. Perhaps we will meet on other threads. I can no longer respond here do to the immature sniping by 2ndGen. If he thinks he has “won” the debate, that is okay. You have for the most part responded with charity and respect. Thank you.

Peace and blessings

 

[Mickey]

only the True Church called by the True God can do things that are perfect such as the sacrifice of humility and ask forgiveness not because they are guilty but for the sake of all mankind.

I also think an apology is warranted for this:

During World War II, Pavelic Regime Offered Croatian Jews Conversion To Catholicism & Contributing Personal Property - In Return For Not Being Deported To Death Camp. However, IsraCast Has Uncovered Evidence That Even These Jews & Their Families Were Later Executed By Ustasha.
Some of the most horrific Holocaust atrocities against Jews were perpetrated by the Pavelic regime in Croatia. The tragic history of the Jewish communities in that country has yet to be told because there are literally no survivors. But part of the documentation still survives. On this Holocaust and Remembrance Day, Avi Yaffe of IsraCast reveals documented evidence of how the Catholic church collaborated in the annihilation of the Jewish communities of Croatia. The town of Vukovar, located on the Croatian border with Serbia, is but an example of what transpired in Croatia where the Ustasha movement was unleashed, with the support of the Catholic church, to launch a sadistic campaign of murder and torture against Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. The Ustasha barbarity was said to have even shocked their German masters.

After the collapse of Yugoslavia, on April 11, 1941, the Nazis installed a puppet regime in Croatia headed by Ante Pavelic, a terrorist who lead the clero-fascist Ustasha movement. Pavelic and his followers had been in exile in Italy under the protection of Mussolini and was wanted in both France and Yugoslavia for orchestrating the assassination of King Alexander of Yugoslavia and French Foreign Minister Louis Barthou. The regime he established in Croatia was called the NDH (Independent State of Croatia). It was run by the Ustasha party, an organization which combined fascist and Catholic ideologies with the goal of building a Croatia cleansed of its ethnic and religious rivals, the Eastern Orthodox Serbs.
isracast.com/articles/544.aspx

 

[2ndGen]

why should they? only the True Church called by the True God can do things that are perfect such as the sacrifice of humility and ask forgiveness not because they are guilt but for the sake of all mankind.

I guess, if Jesus is supposedly “their” leader, then Jesus has to apologize for the atrocities perpretated in Kosovo by Orthodox Christians.

How blasphemous is that?

 

[wisdomseeker]

Hi wisdomseeker,

I would like to wish you well. Perhaps we will meet on other threads. I can no longer respond here do to the immature sniping by 2ndGen. If he thinks he has “won” the debate, that is okay. You have for the most part responded with charity and respect. Thank you.

Peace and blessings

thank you very much. i hope to talk to you again. it was a pleasure to me to have this debate with you.
I pray that one day we all be one again.
peace be onto you.

 

[Mickey]

I pray that one day we all be one again.

Me too!

 

[AquinasT]

I can see that I am stepping into an ongoing discussion here, but since this is an “Unstructured Thread” I figured it would be alright…

Something strikes me as puzzling about the way the Orthodox Churches describe themselves, and it is precisely the “plural” nature of their identity to which I refer. The Orthodox Church-‘es’ are autocephalous - each is its own “head” - the bishop of each local church holds authority in that church, with no “pope” above them. Now in support of this concept the Orthodox argue that all bishops hold in common the “keys to the kingdom” and thus are all equals in their authority, and have the power to “bind and loose.”

Yet (even with this idea of equality) there is also a certain respect paid to those Orthodox Churches which can trace themselves back to Apostolic times. The Patriarchates have a certain elevated status among the Orthodox Churches. This seems to contradict the notion of equality among bishops. There is a certain understanding that the origins of a particular Church can give it a higher status than younger bishoprics. And beyond this there is even an acknowledgment among the Orthodox that Rome (if she were to return to “orthodox” teaching) would enjoy a certain primacy of honor, even above the other Patriarchates.

Now I am having trouble figuring out how on the one hand all bishops have an equal share in authority, and are autonomous Churches united in their equality; yet on the other hand there are certain Churches which are MORE equal, even to the extent that Rome may be the MOST “equal” …In other words, this theory of the equality of every bishop in the Orthodox Churches does not seem to play itself out in practice. The Orthodox are even willing to admit that Peter’s See in Rome deserves a certain higher recognition than the others, if it is done on their terms…but what are those terms?

If Peter does deserve this recognition isn’t it precisely because it was only to him that Christ said He would give the “keys”? (If not, then what other reason could there be? - and I really do want to hear an answer to this question.)

Quoting some Church Father on this or any issue does not make it true. Some Fathers may very well have stated that the keys are shared (and I agree - as in “Ecumenical Councils,” which may be the correct understanding of this interpretation - a sharing of Peter’s authority with the others in Council). But many Fathers disagreed on certain issues before doctrines became solidified in their development. And many did not state the case as precisely as we do now. One man’s opinion might be interesting but how does it play out in history?

If each bishop has the authority to bind and loose, then each bishop might wander off into any number of heretical teachings and the church becomes splintered. Some bishops did just that during certain points in history. Ask an Eastern bishop his opinion of the divinity of Christ when many were lost in the Arian heresy…

The description the Orthodox Churches give of themselves as independent Church-es, seems to describe a splintered group of mini-Catholic Churches. Each bishop is his own pope, each binding and loosing any number of things that may contradict another bishop. But if these separate Churches really want to recognize Peter’s “primacy” - that is, if Peter’s See has any place of honor (as the Orthodox agree it does) - then shouldn’t that primacy be precisely to maintain orthodoxy in the face of so many dissenting opinions among the other bishops?

In other words, the Eastern Churches once turned to Rome to settle disputes even when their own bishops had gone astray, precisely because they recognized her primacy, and they recognized the need to speak with one voice. Now they turn away when she asserts her primacy against their own varied opinions.

No one Orthodox Church speaks for all others. Does this not suggest that they yearn for the one voice of Peter to turn to once more?

Thomas

 

[wisdomseeker]

I also think an apology is warranted for this:

During World War II, Pavelic Regime Offered Croatian Jews Conversion To Catholicism & Contributing Personal Property - In Return For Not Being Deported To Death Camp. However, IsraCast Has Uncovered Evidence That Even These Jews & Their Families Were Later Executed By Ustasha.
Some of the most horrific Holocaust atrocities against Jews were perpetrated by the Pavelic regime in Croatia. The tragic history of the Jewish communities in that country has yet to be told because there are literally no survivors. But part of the documentation still survives. On this Holocaust and Remembrance Day, Avi Yaffe of IsraCast reveals documented evidence of how the Catholic church collaborated in the annihilation of the Jewish communities of Croatia. The town of Vukovar, located on the Croatian border with Serbia, is but an example of what transpired in Croatia where the Ustasha movement was unleashed, with the support of the Catholic church, to launch a sadistic campaign of murder and torture against Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. The Ustasha barbarity was said to have even shocked their German masters.

After the collapse of Yugoslavia, on April 11, 1941, the Nazis installed a puppet regime in Croatia headed by Ante Pavelic, a terrorist who lead the clero-fascist Ustasha movement. Pavelic and his followers had been in exile in Italy under the protection of Mussolini and was wanted in both France and Yugoslavia for orchestrating the assassination of King Alexander of Yugoslavia and French Foreign Minister Louis Barthou. The regime he established in Croatia was called the NDH (Independent State of Croatia). It was run by the Ustasha party, an organization which combined fascist and Catholic ideologies with the goal of building a Croatia cleansed of its ethnic and religious rivals, the Eastern Orthodox Serbs.
isracast.com/articles/544.aspx

i quite understand what you are saying. i am not saying that some catholics did nothing wrong on ocasions although they are exagerated. but we cannot deny the fact that the catholic church was the only entity that helped to save thousand of jews from germans. this is recognized even by the secular world today when they can no longer deny this.

 

[2ndGen]

I can see that I am stepping into an ongoing discussion here, but since this is an “Unstructured Thread” I figured it would be alright…

In other words, the Eastern Churches once turned to Rome to settle disputes even when their own bishops had gone astray, precisely because they recognized her primacy, and they recognized the need to speak with one voice. Now they turn away when she asserts her primacy against their own varied opinions.

No one Orthodox Church speaks for all others. Does this not suggest that they yearn for the one voice of Peter to turn to once more?

Thomas

If not for the limit on Smileys, probably all of my responses would’ve ended in this…

 

[Mickey]

Now they turn away when she asserts her primacy against their own varied opinions.

I have not the time to respond to your many errors in this post, but I would like to know what you mean by varied opinions.

No one Orthodox Church speaks for all others. Does this not suggest that they yearn for the one voice of Peter to turn to once more?

You forget that the Holy Orthodox Church has St Peter too.

 

[drafdog]

Current pope probably can’t *legally *be bishop of Rome. He’s a citizen of a nation not a signatory of the EEU and therefore needs a work visa from the local government office. Problem is that you won’t get one if an Italian is qualified to hold the position. Probably can’t get the necessary visa. Besides, who ever heard of a country granting a work visa to the head of state of a foreign country? Not going to get that visa. Can’t take the job. Sorry.
No matter who gets elected, he suffers from the same problem of being the citizen of a foreign country and a head of state at that.
That’s why the pope fobs the job off on some other poor flunky. Current title of flunky: Vicar for Rome.
Solution: Give up the Vatican State.

Matthew

 

[2ndGen]

i quite understand what you are saying. i am not saying that some catholics did nothing wrong on ocasions although they are exagerated. but we cannot deny the fact that the catholic church was the only entity that helped to save thousand of jews from germans. this is recognized even by the secular world today when they can no longer deny this.

In this country (where the majority are Protestants), we get the worst press. While the incidents of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church involved roughly 240 per year, it seemed that we were this horrific organization which instutionally taught men to molest children when the reality of the matter was that Protestant churches report and average of 3,600 incidents per year.

Yet where is all the “Christian” outrage over them? All we hear are crickets chirping.

Are not those Protestant children as equally important as the Catholic children are? I guess, their religion’s “image” is more important (and they judge those in the Catholic heirchy who did the same exact thing they did).

We are always going to be denounced, attacked, defamed and misrepresented by a religion that was based on revolting against us in the same way that Luther, (cough, cough) I mean Lucifer, and his demons (those that followed him away from Heaven) attack God’s children.

 

[wisdomseeker]

In this country (where the majority are Protestants), we get the worst press. While the incidents of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church involved roughly 240 per year, it seemed that we were this horrific organization which instutionally taught men to molest children when the reality of the matter was that Protestant churches report and average of 3,600 incidents per year.

Yet where is all the “Christian” outrage over them? All we hear are crickets chirping.

Are not those Protestant children as equally important as the Catholic children are? I guess, their religion’s “image” is more important (and they judge those in the Catholic heirchy who did the same exact thing they did).

We are always going to be denounced, attacked, defamed and misrepresented by a religion that was based on revolting against us in the same way that Luther, (cough, cough) I mean Lucifer, and his demons (those that followed him away from Heaven) attack God’s children.

yes. i quite understand that. but as Jesus was presecuted so as his church and we are in his church we must accept that. we must pick up our crosses and follow him. it will be like this until He comes again.
peace

 

[AquinasT]

**"…I would like to know what you mean by varied opinions."
**
For one thing, I mean that the Orthodox Churches have a checkered past as to their own “orthodoxy.” There have been times when nearly all of the Eastern Sees have slipped into heresy, deposed their bishops, rejected saintly Fathers of the Church, and then turned to Rome to sort out the mess. That is what I mean from an historical perspective - many voices come to us from the East through the centuries and they are not at all united in orthodoxy. But in our own time, and more to the point, I am referring to the ecumenical dialog where the Orthodox Churches do not speak unanimously and thus have “varied opinions” as to the precise meaning of things like “Roman primacy” for instance, or how to approach the question of the Protestant churches, or how to deal with the “filoque” controversy. When in dialog with the Orthodox the Catholic Church speaks with “one voice” through the See of Peter. However, when we meet the Orthodox to discuss doctrinal disputes we find it necessary to confront each Patriarch, each bishop of each diocese. There are “varied opinions” out there on many issues within the Orthodox Churches. No two Orthodox Churches view things exactly the same. The Orthodox have rejected the idea of Peter’s See settling such disputes. There is no mechanism within the Orthodox communion to sort out which opinion is correct. That is why I say that “Peter” is absent from the Orthodox communion. It is a willful rejection of what Peter stood for in the ancient Church - he stood for a unity of bishops under the primacy of honor granted to Peter.
Thomas