What Would The Catholic Church Have To Concede?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
dzheremi said:
Judging from my grandmother's looks, I'm guessing Scandinavian. According to family history/legend, that side were in Greenland for centuries and only left beautiful downtown Nuuk or wherever for America roughly 100 years ago (~20 years before my grandmother was born). My middle name comes from Erik the Red (though it's Anglicized), who they say is a distant relative. I'm not sure I believe that, but maybe I'm just proof that you shouldn't marry into families full of squat Latin people if you want to retain your Nordic giantness and translucentivity.

Oh whatever, spell check. You know what I mean.
Me too, though it seems my sons are reversing the trend.  Except I have the blue eyes.
 

dzheremi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
4,417
Reaction score
0
Points
0
theistgal said:
ialmisry said:
we don't have apparitions to abandon.
Sure you do.  http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=46216.0

http://youtu.be/QnwJTGTmMDo

Just because you personally don't like them doesn't mean they don't happen.
I missed where any of these apparitions introduced changes in practice or new devotions comparable to the widespread "Sacred Heart" and other devotions well known to the Latins of your communion, to say nothing of the more blatantly offensive calls to convert whole nations to Roman Catholicism. Nice try, but I don't think they're directly comparable.
 

theistgal

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sunny Southern Cal
dzheremi said:
theistgal said:
ialmisry said:
we don't have apparitions to abandon.
Sure you do.  http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=46216.0

http://youtu.be/QnwJTGTmMDo

Just because you personally don't like them doesn't mean they don't happen.
I missed where any of these apparitions introduced changes in practice or new devotions comparable to the widespread "Sacred Heart" and other devotions well known to the Latins of your communion, to say nothing of the more blatantly offensive calls to convert whole nations to Roman Catholicism. Nice try, but I don't think they're directly comparable.
I didn't say they did. But it was stated that Catholics would have to give up all their apparitions. No one clarified, "except the ones that didn't introduce any new devotions or practices".  Tit for tat.  8)
 

dzheremi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
4,417
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Why would that need to be specified? That's the entire problem with RCC apparitions in the first place. It's not like when some devout Catholic somewhere swears up and down that they see the image of the Virgin Mary in a grilled cheese sandwich, any of us (RC or EO or OO) have to rush out and condemn it, because that's an obvious case of crazy. The problem is with the apparitions that your communion has accepted, and the aberrations that flow from them. If it were a matter of apparitions that don't declare this or that or pass secret messages on to Portuguese school girls or whatever, we most likely would not be having this conversation. If you want to believe that the Theotokos chills out with you and watches over you as you knit and watch TV or something, that's up to you, but the second some apparition opens its ghost-mouth and says "I am the immaculate conception!", we have the right and the duty to say "Nope. No way. Not acceptable. Everyone who believes in Orthodoxy should run away from this thing, right away."

 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,850
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Kniaziev, Lossky maybe even Evdokimov, also Bulgakov had no problem with the Lourdes apparitions . That is to say they look more trustworthy than a Copt in NM.
 

Wandile

Archon
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
3,230
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
ialmisry said:
Wandile said:
Some of the demands here are interesting. What I find most disturbing are that some of these demands impose on the traditions of the Roman church. (Byzantinization)

imagine upon reunion, Rome demanded all eastern churches to keep a celebate clergy, to use a new liturgy, to abandon all post schism saints and apparitions etc... Sometimes its better to avoid conflict if such practices are not contradictory to your own doctrine. We have different traditions and they must be respected :)
says who?

we don't have apparitions to abandon. That's why you would have to abandon yours.
hmmm even Photius agrees to the idea that sometimes things are just some differently in the east and west and both traditions should be respected
 

AntoniousNikolas

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
7,237
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
East Coast, USA
xOrthodox4Christx said:
Maybe the celibacy thing. But the new liturgy or at least a renewed liturgy is a must. This won't do.
+100

dzheremi said:
You don't have to give anything up to be Orthodox save the things you shouldn't have adopted in the first place, because they were never true to begin with.
Right, like the farce that xOrthodox4Christx linked to above.  Leaving all other issues aside for a moment, since for me lex orandi, lex credendi, I could conceive of being in communion with this, but never in a billion years this.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
Wandile said:
Married men can't get ordained even as a priest in an eastern church in Poland?
It was big news when JPII was still alive and when Cardinal Soldano forbade Byzantine Catholic married men from being ordained to the Priesthood in Poland.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Wandile said:
ialmisry said:
Wandile said:
Some of the demands here are interesting. What I find most disturbing are that some of these demands impose on the traditions of the Roman church. (Byzantinization)

imagine upon reunion, Rome demanded all eastern churches to keep a celebate clergy, to use a new liturgy, to abandon all post schism saints and apparitions etc... Sometimes its better to avoid conflict if such practices are not contradictory to your own doctrine. We have different traditions and they must be respected :)
says who?

we don't have apparitions to abandon. That's why you would have to abandon yours.
hmmm even Photius agrees to the idea that sometimes things are just some differently in the east and west and both traditions should be respected
key word and emphasis: sometimes, and only when they do not contradict dogma.
 

BTRAKAS

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
67
Location
North Royalton, Ohio
orthodox4life said:
Do any of you, who've been Orthodox for awhile, really believe that the Catholics would ever concede?
No.  The Roman Catholic Church will not compromise what Orthodox Christianity views as innovations. Not in the foreseeable future; something drastic on the world scene would have to change for the Roman Catholic Church to considered changes to accommodate Eastern Orthodox concerns.

What the Roman Catholic Church seeks is to bring Eastern Orthodoxy into its embrace under its current structure, akin to the manner in which their Byzantine Rites exist within the Roman Catholic Church.

Never-the-less, I don't think this should diminish the importance of Eastern Orthodoxy maintaining dialogue, the "Dialogue of Love," with the Roman Catholic Church, neither should it preclude non-ecclesial, joint initiatives, to promote traditional Trinitarian Christian witness to the world, which suffers from secularism and the scourge of the Moslems.
 

sheenj

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
1,429
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
28
Wandile said:
ialmisry said:
Wandile said:
Some of the demands here are interesting. What I find most disturbing are that some of these demands impose on the traditions of the Roman church. (Byzantinization)

imagine upon reunion, Rome demanded all eastern churches to keep a celebate clergy, to use a new liturgy, to abandon all post schism saints and apparitions etc... Sometimes its better to avoid conflict if such practices are not contradictory to your own doctrine. We have different traditions and they must be respected :)
says who?

we don't have apparitions to abandon. That's why you would have to abandon yours.
hmmm even Photius agrees to the idea that sometimes things are just some differently in the east and west and both traditions should be respected
Unfortunately, the Vatican has a long history of doing just the opposite.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Michał Kalina said:
Maria said:
How would that happen without compromises being made such as the New Calendar imposition?
Catholics do not even have unified calendar among themselves.
Quite true. The Ruthenian Green Catholics in Slovakia are MOSTLY all on the full western calendar, including the Paschalion, while their counterparts in Transcarpathia (Muchachevo) are entirely on the full-blown Julian calendar including the Paschalion. Both eparchies are the ones which submitted to Rome under the Union of Uzhorod.  Go figure.
 

theistgal

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sunny Southern Cal
dzheremi said:
Why would that need to be specified? That's the entire problem with RCC apparitions in the first place. It's not like when some devout Catholic somewhere swears up and down that they see the image of the Virgin Mary in a grilled cheese sandwich, any of us (RC or EO or OO) have to rush out and condemn it, because that's an obvious case of crazy. The problem is with the apparitions that your communion has accepted, and the aberrations that flow from them. If it were a matter of apparitions that don't declare this or that or pass secret messages on to Portuguese school girls or whatever, we most likely would not be having this conversation. If you want to believe that the Theotokos chills out with you and watches over you as you knit and watch TV or something, that's up to you, but the second some apparition opens its ghost-mouth and says "I am the immaculate conception!", we have the right and the duty to say "Nope. No way. Not acceptable. Everyone who believes in Orthodoxy should run away from this thing, right away."
I disagree with about 85% of what you said there; will let you guess which 15% I agreed with.
 

dzheremi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
4,417
Reaction score
0
Points
0
theistgal said:
dzheremi said:
Why would that need to be specified? That's the entire problem with RCC apparitions in the first place. It's not like when some devout Catholic somewhere swears up and down that they see the image of the Virgin Mary in a grilled cheese sandwich, any of us (RC or EO or OO) have to rush out and condemn it, because that's an obvious case of crazy. The problem is with the apparitions that your communion has accepted, and the aberrations that flow from them. If it were a matter of apparitions that don't declare this or that or pass secret messages on to Portuguese school girls or whatever, we most likely would not be having this conversation. If you want to believe that the Theotokos chills out with you and watches over you as you knit and watch TV or something, that's up to you, but the second some apparition opens its ghost-mouth and says "I am the immaculate conception!", we have the right and the duty to say "Nope. No way. Not acceptable. Everyone who believes in Orthodoxy should run away from this thing, right away."
I disagree with about 85% of what you said there; will let you guess which 15% I agreed with.
And you may guess which 100% of your disagreement I will not be hung up on.
 

theistgal

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sunny Southern Cal
dzheremi said:
theistgal said:
dzheremi said:
Why would that need to be specified? That's the entire problem with RCC apparitions in the first place. It's not like when some devout Catholic somewhere swears up and down that they see the image of the Virgin Mary in a grilled cheese sandwich, any of us (RC or EO or OO) have to rush out and condemn it, because that's an obvious case of crazy. The problem is with the apparitions that your communion has accepted, and the aberrations that flow from them. If it were a matter of apparitions that don't declare this or that or pass secret messages on to Portuguese school girls or whatever, we most likely would not be having this conversation. If you want to believe that the Theotokos chills out with you and watches over you as you knit and watch TV or something, that's up to you, but the second some apparition opens its ghost-mouth and says "I am the immaculate conception!", we have the right and the duty to say "Nope. No way. Not acceptable. Everyone who believes in Orthodoxy should run away from this thing, right away."
I disagree with about 85% of what you said there; will let you guess which 15% I agreed with.
And you may guess which 100% of your disagreement I will not be hung up on.
Let's see, your 100% of my 85% disagreement = one grilled cheese sandwich with a ghost-mouth.
 

dzheremi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
4,417
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Y'see, with a ghost mouth it's not technically breaking the fast...
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
Kniaziev, Lossky maybe even Evdokimov, also Bulgakov had no problem with the Lourdes apparitions . That is to say they look more trustworthy than a Copt in NM.
The Copt is right, and Bulgakov is wrong.  Not the only time, btw.
 

Wandile

Archon
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
3,230
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
ialmisry said:
Wandile said:
ialmisry said:
Wandile said:
Some of the demands here are interesting. What I find most disturbing are that some of these demands impose on the traditions of the Roman church. (Byzantinization)

imagine upon reunion, Rome demanded all eastern churches to keep a celebate clergy, to use a new liturgy, to abandon all post schism saints and apparitions etc... Sometimes its better to avoid conflict if such practices are not contradictory to your own doctrine. We have different traditions and they must be respected :)
says who?

we don't have apparitions to abandon. That's why you would have to abandon yours.
hmmm even Photius agrees to the idea that sometimes things are just some differently in the east and west and both traditions should be respected
key word and emphasis: sometimes, and only when they do not contradict dogma.
exactly
 

rakovsky

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
12,009
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
USA
Website
rakovskii.livejournal.com
Rome would have to concede its claim to papal supremacy, what Isa calls ultramontism. The idea that the Pope is to the Patriarchs like an emperor to all others cannot stay, because this belief prevents the EOs from having their own beliefs and practices when the Pope disagrees with them. The Pope can simply order them to do whatever he will want, and if they are one Church it becomes an unworkable contradiction. An idea that "oh, he would never do that against their will" is not practical or secure, because sometimes the Pope believes X and EOs think Y. But if the Pope is the ultimate hierarch it becomes a situation where you must accept his beliefs because he is your hierarch.
 

JoeS2

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
1,675
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
80
Location
Abington, PA USA
rakovsky said:
Rome would have to concede its claim to papal supremacy, what Isa calls ultramontism. The idea that the Pope is to the Patriarchs like an emperor to all others cannot stay, because this belief prevents the EOs from having their own beliefs and practices when the Pope disagrees with them. The Pope can simply order them to do whatever he will want, and if they are one Church it becomes an unworkable contradiction. An idea that "oh, he would never do that against their will" is not practical or secure, because sometimes the Pope believes X and EOs think Y. But if the Pope is the ultimate hierarch it becomes a situation where you must accept his beliefs because he is your hierarch.
Suffice it to say, we don't see any chance of unity at least in this lifetime.  But, it is good that we do have dialogues from time to time for discussing the deplorable state of morals in the world.  I for one, would not tolerate any compromising of our Faith just for the sake of obtaining a unity.  Its just not worth it. 
 

paedenfield

Newbie
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Buford, GA USA
Basil 320 said:
orthodox4life said:
Do any of you, who've been Orthodox for awhile, really believe that the Catholics would ever concede?
What the Roman Catholic Church seeks is to bring Eastern Orthodoxy into its embrace under its current structure, akin to the manner in which their Byzantine Rites exist within the Roman Catholic Church.

Never-the-less, I don't think this should diminish the importance of Eastern Orthodoxy maintaining dialogue, the "Dialogue of Love," with the Roman Catholic Church...
I think Basil 320's post is spot-on.  Dialogue is certainly desirable (as opposed to the consequences of lack of dialogue), but actual RC-Orthodox unity seems to me a case of "Be careful what you ask for ..." 
 

Wandile

Archon
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
3,230
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Michał Kalina said:
Wandile said:
Michał Kalina said:
Married Greek Catholic men cannot get ordained in Poland.
Explain the situation first. I haven't heard of this...
What to explain? It's selfexplantory.
"Yet even after the proclamation of Orientale Lumen, the situation regarding married clergy came to another critical head in early 1998 when on the request of the Polish Latin Church hierarchy, the Vatican Secretary of State, Angelo Cardinal Sodano ordered all married Ukrainian Catholic priests out of their parishes in Poland back to Ukraine, due once more to the Latin Church claiming their presence as being scandalous. What had occurred was that with the collapse of Communism in the East, the Ukrainian seminaries had now been re-opened, their thresholds being crossed by hundreds of young married men. Then in 1998 — these ordained young men were now flooding from their seminaries to once abandoned parishes, along with their wives and children. This was all too much for a fiercely Latin Church nation, such as Poland. The tone of Cardinal Sodano's order and its clause that only celibate priests be allowed within Poland's national boundaries was gravely in breach of the spirit of unity in diversity, and the Papal exhortation of 1995.

The use of the Latin term 'uxorati' in Cardinal Sodano's letter referring to married clergy was also another key area of contention. This action created an enormous backlash from the Eastern Catholic Churches worldwide to which the decision was later revoked and an apology was forthcoming.
http://www.catholica.com.au/andrewstake/041c_print.php "

So from the looks of it, Greek Catholics can become priests in Poland. It was an unfortunate error on the part of Cardinal Sodano who himself is notorious for other scandalous things. I'm not a fan of him.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,164
Reaction score
36
Points
48
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Where was this:

Wandile said:
So from the looks of it, Greek Catholics can become priests in Poland. It was an unfortunate error on the part of Cardinal Sodano who himself is notorious for other scandalous things. I'm not a fan of him.
Anywhere in this:

"Yet even after the proclamation of Orientale Lumen, the situation regarding married clergy came to another critical head in early 1998 when on the request of the Polish Latin Church hierarchy, the Vatican Secretary of State, Angelo Cardinal Sodano ordered all married Ukrainian Catholic priests out of their parishes in Poland back to Ukraine, due once more to the Latin Church claiming their presence as being scandalous. What had occurred was that with the collapse of Communism in the East, the Ukrainian seminaries had now been re-opened, their thresholds being crossed by hundreds of young married men. Then in 1998 — these ordained young men were now flooding from their seminaries to once abandoned parishes, along with their wives and children. This was all too much for a fiercely Latin Church nation, such as Poland. The tone of Cardinal Sodano's order and its clause that only celibate priests be allowed within Poland's national boundaries was gravely in breach of the spirit of unity in diversity, and the Papal exhortation of 1995.

The use of the Latin term 'uxorati' in Cardinal Sodano's letter referring to married clergy was also another key area of contention. This action created an enormous backlash from the Eastern Catholic Churches worldwide to which the decision was later revoked and an apology was forthcoming.
http://www.catholica.com.au/andrewstake/041c_print.php "
?

I've read it thrice and am not seeing it. 
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
Wandile said:
So from the looks of it, Greek Catholics can become priests in Poland. It was an unfortunate error on the part of Cardinal Sodano who himself is notorious for other scandalous things. I'm not a fan of him.
They can't. They are being ordained outside Poland.
 

Wandile

Archon
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
3,230
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Mor Ephrem said:
Where was this:

Wandile said:
So from the looks of it, Greek Catholics can become priests in Poland. It was an unfortunate error on the part of Cardinal Sodano who himself is notorious for other scandalous things. I'm not a fan of him.
Anywhere in this:

"Yet even after the proclamation of Orientale Lumen, the situation regarding married clergy came to another critical head in early 1998 when on the request of the Polish Latin Church hierarchy, the Vatican Secretary of State, Angelo Cardinal Sodano ordered all married Ukrainian Catholic priests out of their parishes in Poland back to Ukraine, due once more to the Latin Church claiming their presence as being scandalous. What had occurred was that with the collapse of Communism in the East, the Ukrainian seminaries had now been re-opened, their thresholds being crossed by hundreds of young married men. Then in 1998 — these ordained young men were now flooding from their seminaries to once abandoned parishes, along with their wives and children. This was all too much for a fiercely Latin Church nation, such as Poland. The tone of Cardinal Sodano's order and its clause that only celibate priests be allowed within Poland's national boundaries was gravely in breach of the spirit of unity in diversity, and the Papal exhortation of 1995.

The use of the Latin term 'uxorati' in Cardinal Sodano's letter referring to married clergy was also another key area of contention. This action created an enormous backlash from the Eastern Catholic Churches worldwide to which the decision was later revoked and an apology was forthcoming.
http://www.catholica.com.au/andrewstake/041c_print.php "
?

I've read it thrice and am not seeing it. 
it says "This action created an enormous backlash from the Eastern Catholic Churches worldwide to which the decision was later revoked and an apology was forthcoming."

The decision to ban married Greek Clergy was revoked.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,164
Reaction score
36
Points
48
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Wandile said:
it says "This action created an enormous backlash from the Eastern Catholic Churches worldwide to which the decision was later revoked and an apology was forthcoming."

The decision to ban married Greek Clergy was revoked.
But what was revoked?  The clergy affected by Card. Sodano's decree were already ordained priests.  If the decision to remove them from their parishes was revoked, all that means is that they were allowed to come back.  It doesn't necessarily address permitting the ordination of married men.  And, if Michal's on the ground version of things is to be believed, they are not allowed to ordain married men, but have to send them elsewhere to get ordained and then come back.  Such things have happened in America as well.  It's sad, because it makes both ordination and marriage look like something dirty that has to be hidden from polite company.   
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Mor Ephrem said:
Wandile said:
it says "This action created an enormous backlash from the Eastern Catholic Churches worldwide to which the decision was later revoked and an apology was forthcoming."

The decision to ban married Greek Clergy was revoked.
But what was revoked?  The clergy affected by Card. Sodano's decree were already ordained priests.  If the decision to remove them from their parishes was revoked, all that means is that they were allowed to come back.  It doesn't necessarily address permitting the ordination of married men.  And, if Michal's on the ground version of things is to be believed, they are not allowed to ordain married men, but have to send them elsewhere to get ordained and then come back.  Such things have happened in America as well.  It's sad, because it makes both ordination and marriage look like something dirty that has to be hidden from polite company.   
Ditto the letter of the head of their Episcopal Conference of Italy telling their Romanian Major Archbishop not to send married priests to Italy (of course, mandating celibacy in Romania is A-OK).

This was brought up at a Synod of their Middle Eastern bishops at the Vatican.  AFAIK, only silence has ensued.
 

Wandile

Archon
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
3,230
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Mor Ephrem said:
Wandile said:
it says "This action created an enormous backlash from the Eastern Catholic Churches worldwide to which the decision was later revoked and an apology was forthcoming."

The decision to ban married Greek Clergy was revoked.
But what was revoked?  The clergy affected by Card. Sodano's decree were already ordained priests.  If the decision to remove them from their parishes was revoked, all that means is that they were allowed to come back.  It doesn't necessarily address permitting the ordination of married men.  And, if Michal's on the ground version of things is to be believed, they are not allowed to ordain married men, but have to send them elsewhere to get ordained and then come back.  Such things have happened in America as well.  It's sad, because it makes both ordination and marriage look like something dirty that has to be hidden from polite company.   
You have a point. Its not dealing with the ordination of married men to the priesthood.
I have heard the reasoning is that in largely Latin lands, it would cause friction which is historically accurate. However in not clued up enough on this topic to speak about. Ask Deacon Lance... maybe he knows :-\
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top