What do Orthodox Christians think of this?

[Harpazo]

Some “EO” priest you have heard praise Catolic hierarchy. Because of this my faith is to be shake?? No, my friend, I do not know situation in your country. But I know and have lived with absolute despots (Iosif Vissarionovich). I prefer “confusion” to despotic certainy. I prefer the action of Holy Spirit to commands of Curia or Politburo.

No, you need to reconsider your need for an ecclesial dictator. Certainly in some ways life is easier WITH DICTATOR - with our beloved Leader we did not have to think, we did not complain, we thought life was good, we would even have thought black was white - all wept when the Great One died. Wept because life without a dictator would be hard - but it is so much better. Same is true for Church.

Peter Apostl would not recognize Vatican and bureaucracy. Remember that role of Peter was to help, not to rule, to command. If Eastern church is to find Petrine role for bishop of Rome, it cannot be as Supreme Ruler, but as encouraging brother perhaps.

This is where you and many other Orthodox fail to understand and recognize the Catholic belief of the Pope of Rome. We don’t see him as a ruler, but as a helper and a guide who holds authority. Just because he has the authority, doesn’t mean he will abuse it, although sadly, some have. That’s all he does is guides us. He doesn’t rule with a rod of iron, as you might think. Popes are still sinners, but just because they have the authority given to them by Christ Our Lord does not give them reason to abuse it. The Pope is a shepherd. Pure and Simple.

Whether you like it or not, the Pope of Rome has always had a place of authority in the Church, even before the schism.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[jam070406]

This is where you and many other Orthodox fail to understand and recognize the Catholic belief of the Pope of Rome. We don’t see him as a ruler, but as a helper and a guide who holds authority. Just because he has the authority, doesn’t mean he will abuse it, although sadly, some have. That’s all he does is guides us. He doesn’t rule with a rod of iron, as you might think. Popes are still sinners, but just because they have the authority given to them by Christ Our Lord does not give them reason to abuse it. The Pope is a shepherd. Pure and Simple.

Whether you like it or not, the Pope of Rome has always had a place of authority in the Church, even before the schism.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

Well stated.

It’s not like the Pope was a Czar or ex-KGB member that delcared it’s church the “new” Rome and persecutes other minority religions in his country or jurisdiction. And also fights with other churches in supposed communion such as Constantinople and Romania over jursidiction. THAT sounds like a dictator.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Isa:

The Maronites are accused of monothelitism, but this isn’t so. There were geographical disruptions between them and Rome. They have always been in Communion with Rome, whether you like it or not.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

Indeed, after the union of the eastern church with the western church in the ecumenical council of Florence,…we despatched our venerable brother Andrew…He was also to try to bring back to the truth of the faith, using our warnings and exhortations, whoever else he might find there to be strangers to the truth of faith in other sects, whether they are followers of Nestorius or of Macarius.He pursued this task with vigour, thanks to the wisdom and other virtues with which the Lord, the giver of graces, has enriched him. He finally eliminated from their hearts, after many discussions, first all the impurity…of the most impious Macarius of Antioch who, although he confessed that Christ is true God and man, asserted that there is in him only the divine will and principle of action, thereby diminishing his humanity.
With divine assistance he converted to the truth of the orthodox faith our venerable…Elias, bishop of the Maronites, who with his nation in the same realm was infected with the teachings of Macarius

Then our beloved son in Christ Isaac, envoy of our venerable brother Elias, bishop of the Maronites, on his behalf and in his name, rejecting the heresy of Macarius about one will in Christ, made with great veneration a profession that was similar in all details…a solemn profession of the faith of the Roman church, which by the providence of the Lord and the aid of blessed Peter and the apostle has always remained immaculate …, reverently and devoutly professed this faith and doctrine to us, in this sacred general congregation of the ecumenical Lateran council, first in his own Chaldean tongue, which was interpreted in Greek and then translated from Greek into Latin, as follows: … on behalf of myself and all my peoples in Cyprus, profess, vow and promise to almighty God, Father and Son and holy Spirit, and then to you, most holy and blessed father pope Eugenius IV, to this holy apostolic see and to this holy and venerable congregation, that henceforth I will always remain under the obedience of you and your successors and of the holy Roman church as under the unique mother and head of all other churches. Also, in future I will always hold and profess that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, as the holy Roman church teaches and holds. Also, in future I will always hold and approve two natures, two wills, one hypostasis and two principles of action in Christ.

Acts of the Council of Florence, Session 14.
legionofmarytidewater.com/faith/ECUM17.HTM

It’s your “Ecumenical Council.” If you don’t like it’s decrees, well, I have no part in it.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Well stated.

It’s not like the Pope was a Czar or ex-KGB member that delcared it’s church the “new” Rome and persecutes other minority religions in his country or jurisdiction. And also fights with other churches in supposed communion such as Constantinople and Romania over jursidiction. THAT sounds like a dictator.

The Inquisition

Supression of the Celtic Church

The cadaver synod

Indulgences.

Nepotism.

You might want to trim that log.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Didn’t intent to shake your faith. I merely asked a question. There is chaos in the Orthodox churches in America. I’ve heard Orthodox podcasts discussing this issue. There is no unity among EO churches in America and it’s getting worse. It’s a fact.

And the state of Rome’s american branch is doing fine? Who are you kidding?

 

[VARC]

There is chaos in the Orthodox churches in America. :

If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black…

 

[Isa_Almisry]

When speaking about the body of Christ in Corinthians Paul alludes to a visible head as part of the body. We know who Catholics claim that visible head to be. Why do Orthodox claim there is no visible head when Paul’s epistle speaks of one?

1 Corinthians 12

21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; or again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.”

You’re trying to make apple cider out of oranges.

St. Paul gives a pretty complete list:
28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. 29 All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? 30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they? 31 But earnestly desire the greater gifts.

If a “pope” was so important, and explicitely being referred to (there being no allusion to a visible head as you alleged), he could have stuck it in.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Really? Perhaps you are unaware of the chaos of overlapping, jurisdictional powerplays going on in with Orthodox churches in America. Sometimes 8 bishops over one area. (from the mouth of an EO priest) I’ve even heard Orthodox priests admit that this division is sinful and praised the Catholic structure of hierarchy. Perhaps you need some authority to straigthen it all out. Care to reconsider your opinion of a visible Church head?

No, tried that in 1098, 1099, and of course 1204. Doesn’t work so good.

Let Rome straighten out a few of her problems before worrying about ours.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Your little diatribe on the pope still never answered the question. Paul cleary mentions a head when referring to the body of believers. You deny it.

he also mentions “less presentable members.” Care to exegete that?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Who has said such a thing?

Plenty.

It would be heretical for a Catholic to do so,

yes, but they said it anyway.

and would possibly place them near or in a status of excommunication.

Not if he was pope.

Christianity is not a democracy, which is what Orthodoxy tries to make of it, in my opinion. A vote by Patriarchs does not determine something to be truth. Whenever Popes or secular figures called Councils, nothing in the council was contrary to what the Popes said or believed.

Au contraire, the Fifth struck Pope Vigilius from the diptychs, and the Sixth anathematized Honorius.

There’s an excellent chart in a book by David Currie called Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic that picks a specific time (there were other periods of time than just that) in the Patristic era in which every Apostolic See was in heresy, and some all four at the same time, except Rome. Rome has never, ever been in heresy, and never will because of Christ’s promise to Peter.

Yes, and the hair splitting on Honorius, etc. to make such a statement.

From what I’ve noticed, the Orthodox have basically sat idle since the finilization of the unfortunate split, and can’t develop their doctrine or call an Ecumenical Council. I could be wrong on this matter, but it’s what seems to be.

If it aint’ broke, we’re not going to fix it.

 

[VARC]

From what I’ve noticed, the Orthodox have basically sat idle since the finilization of the unfortunate split, and can’t develop their doctrine or call an Ecumenical Council. I could be wrong on this matter, but it’s what seems to be.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

The Orthodox Church doesn’t feel the pressing need to invent new dogmas not professed by the Fathers and impose those beliefs on Her members under pain of anathema. That’s the method of the RCC.

 

[Hesychios]

What I’ve learned is that there were some Eastern Churches that never separated from Rome, such as the Maronite Church and I think the Italo-Greek Catholic Church.

This is actually incorrect.

The Maronite church was out of communion with all other churches for a time. Even Rome. If anyone presses this claim they will have to admit that there was a Monothelite church structure in full communion with the Pope of Rome. Some Maronites are uncomfortable about this information, but they should not be, the ones I know are very open about their history.

The Italo Albanian church is a special case, because the Roman Catholic church completely suppressed the Italo-Greek church in southern Italy, the entire Roman Catholic diocesan structure of Sicily and southern Italy was Orthodox once, and now has Roman Catholic bishops and priests. You can check this out for yourself.

Albanian Roman Catholics and Orthodox fled to Italy (and elsewhere) after the death of Skanderbeg. Albania became a garrison province for the Turks and most of the remaining population in Albania was (in one way or another) converted to Islam. The Christian refugees arrived after the Council of Florence and so all were accepted as being in communion. There is no connection between them and the earlier population of Greeks, who were by this time Roman Catholics. The claim that this “Sui Iuris” church has ancient roots in Italy is a fiction constructed for apologetic purposes. It’s roots are among Orthodox of the Balkan peninsula from the fifteenth century and beyond.

Do any Orthodox agree with what the quote from the Metropolitan?

It has some merit. I too value the Eastern catholics, I think that they have some role to play in the future by being a conduit for genuine Orthodox teaching, which the Roman catholic church will have to relearn if there is ever reconciliation between our communions.

I think the Eastern Catholics should learn and restore their own traditions and theology as faithfully as possible, to prepare for the gargantuan task of catechizing their Roman Catholic brothers and sisters.

 

[jam070406]

The Inquisition

Supression of the Celtic Church

The cadaver synod

Indulgences.

Nepotism.

You might want to trim that log.

Yes, this list you came up with proves the Pope a dictator. Not.

 

[jam070406]

And the state of Rome’s american branch is doing fine? Who are you kidding?

Does it have overlapping jurisdictions clawing for territory? Not.

 

[jam070406]

If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black…

I wasn’t aware the RCC had a chaotic jurisdiction problem. Not sure what you’re referring to, but I’m sure it’s irrelevant to the discussion of the Orthodox jursidiction problem in America and it’s neccessity for some form of order and authority to step in and straighten out the mess of multiple bishops in one single area.

 

[jam070406]

You’re trying to make apple cider out of oranges.

St. Paul gives a pretty complete list:
28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. 29 All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? 30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they? 31 But earnestly desire the greater gifts.

If a “pope” was so important, and explicitely being referred to (there being no allusion to a visible head as you alleged), he could have stuck it in.

You brought up the Pope (per usual)
I mentioned the head that Paul refers to and what is the Orthodox answer to Paul mentioning a head? You can’t evade the question by defaulting to the Pope. Just answer the question.

 

[jam070406]

he also mentions “less presentable members.” Care to exegete that?

Nice answer. Doesn’t answer the question but it was a nice attempt at diversion. Which, you are quite good at. Welcome back from being suspended by the way.

 

[jam070406]

If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black…

btw, nice cherry picking one sentence out of context to try and avoid the topic and point the finger back at Rome.

 

[jam070406]

The Orthodox Church doesn’t feel the pressing need to invent new dogmas not professed by the Fathers and impose those beliefs on Her members under pain of anathema. That’s the method of the RCC.

:yawn:

 

[jam070406]

No, tried that in 1098, 1099, and of course 1204. Doesn’t work so good.

The United States of America didn’t exist back then.

It took a modern America to shine the light on how inidvidual Orthodox churches with no authority would handle getting a piece of the pie in the new country. You’re right, doesn’t work so good.