D
dzheremi
Guest
My apologies, Trebor. I was addressing that idea, not meaning to imply that you yourself hold it. Sorry for not making that clear.
- Status
T
tabycat
Guest
Maybe it is just of old fashioned case of me right, you wrong stiff neckism:shrug:
T
Trebor135
Guest
Don’t worry about it, ya basha*. Al-salaam ma`ak.
*Do the Egyptians use that expression?
D
dzheremi
Guest
Haha. According to the internet they do, but this is the first time anyone has ever said it to me.
T
tabycat
Guest
IMHO It’s, at times, easter to stay apart then to admit that they’ve (or those before them) made mistakes and sinned against the otherside then to do the painful work to come toghther and stay working together and accept the fact that some wounds may never complely heal.
T
Trebor135
Guest
Alas, there isn’t simply bad blood over history to deal with, but differences over theology and doctrine (see post #13).IMHO It’s, at times, easter to stay apart then to admit that they’ve (or those before them) made mistakes and sinned against the otherside then to do the painful work to come toghther and stay working together and accept the fact that some wounds may never complely heal.
F
Filii_Dei
Guest
Some of which can be attributed to be a product of said bad blood. It’s sad, really. I’m not a primitivist, but I sometimes wish we could turn back time and address our differences as and when they appeared, rather than trying to perform cosmetic surgery on old, deep scars.
T
Trebor135
Guest
That would be an understandable position to hold were you to take it.
Unfortunately, a lot of the fault for the current double impasse (first between the Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, and second between the Catholics and the Oriental Orthodox) can be laid at the door of the Latins for dogmatizing, without any real need, doctrines that very much should have been left as theologoumena, from indulgences to papal infallibility.
F
Filii_Dei
Guest
I recognise the responsibility of the Latin Church in many of these sad incidents, but we must continue work together for the sake of future Christians, that we may leave them a Church that - while not yet united - is closer to unity than it was in our time. I think it is absolutely imperative for us to engage in more dialogue and exchange (as Cardinal Sandri’s unwise comments has clearly shown), and while we must never forget history, this era is an excellent opportunity for us to rebuild bridges that have been burned so very long ago. Both the East and the West have a responsibility to reconcile, even if either believes themselves the greater victim of the other’s transgressions.
Of course, I look forward to a time when we could apologise for our own misdeeds, and reconcile our theology with each other, as brothers.
T
Trebor135
Guest
To your post I must give a heartfelt “amen”.I recognise the responsibility of the Latin Church in many of these sad incidents, but we must continue work together for the sake of future Christians, that we may leave them a Church that - while not yet united - is closer to unity than it was in our time. I think it is absolutely imperative for us to engage in more dialogue and exchange (as Cardinal Sandri’s unwise comments has clearly shown), and while we must never forget history, this era is an excellent opportunity for us to rebuild bridges that have been burned so very long ago. Both the East and the West have a responsibility to reconcile, even if either believes themselves the greater victim of the other’s transgressions.
Of course, I look forward to a time when we could apologise for our own misdeeds, and reconcile our theology with each other, as brothers.
God bless.
T
tabycat
Guest
I know that not just bad blood, but that’s the first thing to get over. Some of that bad blood was caused by not working on the theiology and doctrines in a Christian way, but trying the ‘I’m right, you’re wrong’ way.
I know there are times I’m not very good at saying the right thing at the right time.
T
Trebor135
Guest
Ahh, I see what you’re saying. The Orientals faced sometimes-harsh persecution at the hands of the Chalcedonians, only to come under Islamic subjugation–in Egypt and Greater Syria–later on.
You’re not the only oneI know there are times I’m not very good at saying the right thing at the right time.
T
tabycat
Guest
I know!
T
tabycat
Guest
Thanks for saying so…:dancing trebor135::banghead:
T
Trebor135
Guest
D
dzheremi
Guest
This seems to me like a little bit of an odd statement. As far as concerns the relations of the Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholics, it is important to remember that there really was very, very little contact with Westerners before the era of Roman Catholic missionary work in the 18th century (you can tell this by looking at the dates of union of the various Oriental Catholic Churches: 1741, 1846, 1781, 1930, etc.). So it doesn’t really make sense to talk about “not working on Theology” or “the ‘I’m right, you’re wrong’ way”. The Oriental Churches are not Byzantines/Chalcedonians. We don’t even think about many of the things that you and the EO argue about. The Oriental Orthodox ceased communion with both kinds of Romans (what are now RCs and EOs) over a thousand years before the RCs came back into the picture in Oriental Orthodox lands. So when would we have “worked on Theology” with you? When you were still in union with the churches who would become the EO and your Eastern compatriots were trying to force us to accept Chalcedon and setting up parallel Chalcedonian hierarchies in non-Chalcedonian territories, or many centuries later, when you were out of communion with the EO and poaching our flocks in Armenia, Ethiopia, Egypt, and India?
As far as the idea of “the ‘I’m right, you’re wrong’ way”, this is a red herring, isn’t it? When a Protestant or another non-Catholic comes to you and wants you to accept various things that you see as outside of your faith, do you hesitate to say that this is wrong? Every Apostolic communion does this, and we are no different. There is no compromise in the faith, and the ancient Fathers were not practicing any particular “way” but the Orthodox way when they rebuked Arius, Nestorius, the Donatists, etc. This way is the Christian way, not some sort of neglect of it.
T
tabycat
Guest
When someone (Christian or nonChristian) comes and claimes that the Catholic Church believes/doesn’t believes something, I try to find out how close to the trurth the claime is, and I try to explain the differts between the two. I have had some little experence with some persons, on and off the web, that keep coming back to the same reasons why they are right and everybody else is wrong, BTW, IMO, everybody has some subject that they have a problem in admitting that they might be a shade wrong and the
other person might be just a shade right.:shrug
Peace and God Bless!
D
dzheremi
Guest
Do you have any specific incidents in mind? As far as I can tell from my readings of Oriental history, the conflicts that there were were between Eastern Romans (Byzantines) who were Chalcedonian and the non-Chalcedonian parties in Syria, Egypt, Ethiopia, etc. The Western Romans/Latins don’t really come into the picture before the modern era except for the ones who are commemorated by the Oriental churches (several early Roman bishops fall into this category, as well as North African saints such as St. Augustine).
And yet this is the way we must proceed. Because we still hold to the faith of Nicea, Constantinople, and Ephesus, this is what is important today. All things declared later (whether we’re talking about 1012, 2012, or 3012) are judged by that faith.
I think you might have misread me here. I asked what your reaction is when someone outside of your church comes to you and says that you should believe in things that are at variance with the faith that you have already accepted. This is the parallel that we find in any discussions between Orthodox (either EO or OO) and the Roman Catholic Church: For the EO, they are asked to believe in many new things in order to be in union with Rome, and so they refuse; for the OO, they are asked to believe in many new things in order to be in union with Rome…and so they refuse. And I know that if any non-Catholic were to tell the RCC to believe in new things in order to be in union with them, they would refuse. Like I said, all apostolic churches do this. You have to. It’s what’s right to do, even if the different communions (OO/EO/RC) put the “cut off line” at different points (three councils, seven councils, or however many councils that the RCC is up to now).
Again, this is a good thing (and I’m saying it’s a good thing when RCs do it, too; I may not think you’re right, but I affirm the principle). If you know you’re right, or, as the RC would put it “have the fullness of truth”, then what is there to be even a shade wrong on, dogmatically-speaking? Nothing. I would rather the RC or the EO tell us “You MUST accept Chalcedon and subsequent councils (in so far as is necessary, as some EO councils addressed things that didn’t really need addressing so much in the OO churches, like iconoclasm); this is NOT negotiable” then to try to dialogue with someone who treats the essentials of the faith like a card game: “I’ve got my Papal infallibility card over here; I’ll trade it so long as we can all play at the same table.” I think that is worse than insisting that you are right and others are not when, after all, that is how you see it. It’s not being obstinate, and it definitely doesn’t mean that you can’t still have good relations (e…g, HH Pope Shenouda III visiting his Roman counterpart – the first Coptic Pope to have done so in centuries). It’s just a fact of life, if you’re serious about this whole “Apostolic faith” thing. Stand up for yourselves. You’ll live longer.
T
tabycat
Guest
I was think more in terms of general human misbehaviorl and reacting badly then anyone thing; also,that was the time of the Crusades (sp?).
What I said about things being up that happened a thousand years, that was about what happened (your side beatup my side), not explaning what we believe and why we believe, by using writings that can go back almost two thousand years.
I don’t about anyone else but there have been times that who was right or wrong that I faked being right because I didn’t want to admit that I was wrong. On something like this I’m not sure whitch side is right or wrong and by how much.
What I said about things being up that happened a thousand years, that was about what happened (your side beatup my side), not explaning what we believe and why we believe, by using writings that can go back almost two thousand years.
I don’t about anyone else but there have been times that who was right or wrong that I faked being right because I didn’t want to admit that I was wrong. On something like this I’m not sure whitch side is right or wrong and by how much.
D
dzheremi
Guest
Can you explain why you are invoking the Crusades here? The Crusades happened over 600 years after the split of the church into Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian parties.
What? I’m not sure what you’re trying to convey here.
When we are talking about communion (which is what this thread is about), it cannot be up to personal or individual intuition to decide such things. The Oriental Orthodox are sure that they are right not based on their own intuition of the other side being wrong (because, remember, they wouldn’t have had much direct contact with any Western Christians from roughly 500 AD to 1700 AD), but because of the Apostolic and Patristic witness that has nurtured their churches since the time of the Apostles, the beginning of monasticism in the Egyptian desert, the early days of the schools of Alexandria and Edessa, etc. The Eastern Orthodox and the Latin Catholics also look back to those times, which is why such questions are so difficult to solve: If we share so much common heritage, then who went wrong, when, and how? Who has (doctrinal) things to repudiate, or who should accept things they previously did not accept? Every church will answer these questions differently. Obviously the Orientals do not think they are wrong any more than the Latins or the Byzantines think that they themselves are wrong. And so here we are.I don’t about anyone else but there have been times that who was right or wrong that I faked being right because I didn’t want to admit that I was wrong. On something like this I’m not sure whitch side is right or wrong and by how much.
- Status