• Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator

Can Someone Explain This?

Linus7

Archon
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Deacon Lance said:
"Whether we are Christians, Moslems or Jews, we are children of God and our efforts as peacemakers will be blessed and rewarded by the one God whom we share as common Creator." (Remarks by His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew "New Leadership and the Promise of Peace," October 15, 2000).

http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8072.asp

There is also an upcoming "Interfaith Conference of the Three Monotheistic Religions" at the EP.

http://www.oca.org/pages/news/news.asp?ID=563
Certainly the EP is not above criticism.

I found the first article somewhat troubling, although it did not really contain the sort of blatantly pluralistic remarks attributed to JPII.

This one was particularly bothersome, however:

Patriarch Bartholomew: "... upon all men and women of all ages, religions, races, creeds, and nations of our planet Earth peace and goodwill, beseeching our great and loving God that He grant to all of us the wisdom to truly see one another as we have been created, namely as brothers, sisters, and children of the Lord." (The Orthodox Observer July-August, 2001, p.9).
The second article spoke of a meeting between SCOBA and SCOOCH, bishops of Non-Chalcedonian groups comprising the latter.

Genuine dialogue with other Christians, minus doctrinal compromise, is a good thing, a thing I don't think any Orthodox Christian would criticize.

In the real world even dialogue with non-Christians is sometimes necessary in order to avoid intolerance, conflict, and violence.

But there is a world of difference between dialogue and fraternization, between communication and prostitution, between refraining from spitting on the Koran and bowing to and kissing it.
 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,624
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
62
Location
Maryland
Deacon Lance said:
There is also an upcoming "Interfaith Conference of the Three Monotheistic Religions" at the EP.

http://www.oca.org/pages/news/news.asp?ID=563
What, not the Zoroastrians??
 

Deacon Lance

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Messages
4,533
Reaction score
362
Points
83
Age
50
Location
Washington, PA
Faith
Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction
Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Do Zoroastrians count as monotheists are diotheists? They believe that Ahura Mazda will triumph but that evil is the creation of Angrha Mainyu, thus raising the status of their evil one to co-creator with their lord. It seems they are diotheists to me.

Fr. Deacon Lance
 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,624
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
62
Location
Maryland
Deacon Lance said:
Do Zoroastrians count as monotheists are diotheists? They believe that Ahura Mazda will triumph but that evil is the creation of Angrha Mainyu, thus raising the status of their evil one to co-creator with their lord. It seems they are diotheists to me.
Well, then we are diothiests too. Think of Angrha Mainyu as more like Satan or the serpent in the garden; he isn't a god.
 

lellimore

Sr. Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I would call them monotheists. One God with an enemy who is powerful but not as powerful as He is and who He will destroy at the end of time. Seems to me a lot like Christianity and Judaism.
 

ByzantineSerb

Sr. Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
171
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Linus,

Did you get those other "attributions" from the 101 heresies of John Paul II? If so, not really a credible source.
 

Linus7

Archon
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ByzantineSerb said:
Linus,

Did you get those other "attributions" from the 101 heresies of John Paul II? If so, not really a credible source.
No, I did not. I guess that is the title of a book. Anyway, I've never heard of it.

If you are speaking of the Pope's questionable ecumenical activities, I would be glad to see some credible evidence that shows he did none of those things.

If you are speaking of the quotes from JPII, those came from the article by Robert Sungenis at the link I posted.

If you or anyone else thinks that my purpose in starting this thread was to attack JPII and/or the papacy, you're way off base. I respect the papal office, even if I am critical of some of JPII's actions as its present occupant.

When I started this thread I was hoping someone would provide a good explanation of these things. I was also hoping someone could show me how RCs can be critical of the actions of a specific pope without rejecting the papacy itself as a divine institution.

The responses have been as predictably defensive as they have been disappointing.

What happens when the RCC is subjected to a really bad egg as pope, like another Alexander Borgia?

Will everyone still be making excuses for him?
 

Doubting Thomas

High Elder
Joined
Jul 17, 2003
Messages
887
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Georgia
Linus7 said:
When I started this thread I was hoping someone would provide a good explanation of these things. I was also hoping someone could show me how RCs can be critical of the actions of a specific pope without rejecting the papacy itself as a divine institution.

The responses have been as predictably defensive as they have been disappointing.

What happens when the RCC is subjected to a really bad egg as pope, like another Alexander Borgia?

Will everyone still be making excuses for him?
As (yet) a Baptist inquirer, I would like some good answers to this as well.

So far, I've read WTTE that "it's no big deal" or that "it wasn't ex cathedra". Like Linus, I don't find those answers convincing. For can a pope really make such syncretic comments and perform such blasphemous gestures and it have no bearing on his fitness to be the "successor of St. Peter"? There have been anti-Popes in the past, why is JPII not considered one for suc statements and actions?

(And out of curiosity, just how many "ex cathedra" statements have been made in the past and where are these pronouncements officially listed?)
 
Top