Eastern Catholicism: Orthodox in communion with Rome

[Michael the Iconographer]

Ah well

At least on TAW I'm not slammed for my EC views .

I'm comfortable there - I'm not here :( . Yes even Michael realises that I'm EC - but I don't keep shoving it down their throats. I don't need to be reminded that there are differences between us - we all know it - and I'm always shown respect there - possibly it's because I do not keep telling them that they are wrong .

I dunno - one of these days - many thousands of years in the future - we will come together - but it won't be a case of one coming over to the other - it will be both sides meeting in the middle
:hug: Why would I slam you for being EC? You are always accepted in TAW! :hug:

[Michael the Iconographer]

As I confess in the creed, I believe in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Also, like John Paul II, I believe in having unity between East and West, while respecting the theological and liturgical traditions of each lung.
The whole two lungs theory is such an insulting slap in the face to Orthodoxy!

[stivvy]

The whole two lungs theory is such an insulting slap in the face to Orthodoxy!
Too bad, it is the way it is. Just because a group of us orthodox find it in our hearts to follow the seat of Peter and honor Jesus' wish for unity, doesn't mean those aho are holding back and spreading lies about our witness to the message of Jesus' love shouldn't feel bad about their choice. Anger, distaste for other's decisions and confussion as the EO members here are displaying are results of the struggle with denying the unity. The Catholic Church doesn't deny the unity. She recognizes the EO and sees her as a lost sheep that does have the Holy Ghost giuding her in her efforts and recognizes all her sacriments as true but just missing the unity factor.

Your feeling of being insulted will never go away because we will never deny our unity with the One True Faith. We still love and prya for you all!

[WarriorAngel]

So, is it all lip service to say we pray for unity?

Because I am not seeing that.

It is a pity because stubbornness is contrary to obedience.

:(

I have been seeing remarks unfitting for Christians....
really nasty barbs thrown at fellow members of the One Church.

I am almost certain this same disdain played a hefty role in the ridiculous break to begin with.

WHAT good has come from the disunity?

Doesn't anyone at all see that Christ suffers for our childish disobedience?
This grieves Him....

IS that what we really want?
IS IT!?

I thought love for the Lord, and willingness to obey Him would overcome all or any obstacles.

Yet...that struggle with flesh...will it always win?
SO much so we cannot even see the grief Jesus has over this?

NM.........

I will pray over this.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Too bad, it is the way it is. Just because a group of us orthodox find it in our hearts to follow the seat of Peter and honor Jesus' wish for unity, doesn't mean those aho are holding back and spreading lies about our witness to the message of Jesus' love shouldn't feel bad about their choice. Anger, distaste for other's decisions and confussion as the EO members here are displaying are results of the struggle with denying the unity. The Catholic Church doesn't deny the unity. She recognizes the EO and sees her as a lost sheep that does have the Holy Ghost giuding her in her efforts and recognizes all her sacriments as true but just missing the unity factor.

Your feeling of being insulted will never go away because we will never deny our unity with the One True Faith. We still love and prya for you all!
It is the way it is because of Jesuit prostelytization in the Ukraine. I suggest you read the history of the Slavic Byzantine Churches. Your church did not exist before the false union of Uzhorod.

[Michael the Iconographer]

So, is it all lip service to say we pray for unity?

Because I am not seeing that.

It is a pity because stubbornness is contrary to obedience.

:(

I have been seeing remarks unfitting for Christians....
really nasty barbs thrown at fellow members of the One Church.

I am almost certain this same disdain played a hefty role in the ridiculous break to begin with.

WHAT good has come from the disunity?

Doesn't anyone at all see that Christ suffers for our childish disobedience?
This grieves Him....

IS that what we really want?
IS IT!?

I thought love for the Lord, and willingness to obey Him would overcome all or any obstacles.

Yet...that struggle with flesh...will it always win?
SO much so we cannot even see the grief Jesus has over this?

NM.........

I will pray over this.
Forgive me if I have offended you my friend.

[stivvy]

And for the record, I have never been insulted by anyone on OBOB for being EC. We have had our discussions and disagreements once or twice, but never insulted or made to feel uncomfortable. They are my family in Christ and in our One True Faith.

Love ya all!!

[stivvy]

There is no "false union" ther eis only true unity. We practice it day after day and improve it day after day by the guidence of the Holy Ghost. God raises His strong right hand and is the Healer of the humanistic ills that may occur in our unity throughout time.

The Theotokos prays for it and protects us and loves to see the growth as many blessings have been bestowed upon us! Amen!?!?

[WarriorAngel]

Forgive me if I have offended you my friend.

I realise the Church will never see a perfect 20/20 vision for one another.
Heck, all families have arguments. [I come from a family of 8 kids]
Cultural distinctions play a big part and always has.
Tower of Babel ....much.

People [all of us] need to learn that the differences stem from the same teachings, but we are culturally aware to the different ways of seeing the same thing.


SO since we see something differently, we feel it is right to chastise someone who sees it from a different angle.

For instance...
A metaphoric explanation of St John the Baptist;
Saying he was born there was less light, and when Jesus was born He brought light.

In the West [America] the June month brings in shorter days, less light.
In December it brings in more light and days begin to grow...

BUT you wont see this analogy in Australia...because it is a different season and the days are different.

IT depends on the culture to which is HOW we see the same glass.
One says it is half full, the other says half empty.

St Augustine a Saint for both Churches fought hard against heresies. He won, those heresies died off.

What I do not understand is why the East cannot see the West's side.
WE try to see the side of the East...out of pure love.

Not in any way condescending...but as a 'brother' would appreciate the different personality of his younger sibling.
Same family...different POV.

UP close, under a microscope...the differences are not nearly as large as we want them to be.

I assure you it takes a willingness and utmost love to say...this is such a speck when we see one thing in two lights.

There is a BIG picture...
It is bigger than you or I..
IT is God.

WWJD??

What He already did...He wanted unity.

That is where I pray..to please Him, that the Lord's WIll be done on earth...not mine.

I love ya Michael...
And I would hope if we do disagree we can do so on the issues and not upon each other.

Let us feel the love for one another.:groupray:

WE are ONE in God's eyes.

Heck, someone showed us in another thread that a Patriarch demanded to see his equal on earth, and God showed him a woman washing her clothes...

So dont we all see what God is telling us??


And for the record, I have never been insulted by anyone on OBOB for being EC. We have had our discussions and disagreements once or twice, but never insulted or made to feel uncomfortable. They are my family in Christ and in our One True Faith.

Love ya all!!
:hug:

[Philothei]

I assure you it takes a willingness and utmost love to say...this is such a speck when we see one thing in two lights.



As long as we do not try to take each other's lights out we are progressing in unity... when we try to overshadow each other's light then we do not. I hope you do not missunderstand my comment. As Churches we both carry long long traditions.... we can always meet half way but it will not work to overshadow. And I do believe that true unity is to PRAY for each other and the whole world and we fortunately do. What else is left? The technicalities and politics of both our churches. .... and human egos may I add...

Lord have mercy

God bless,
Philothei

[Michael the Iconographer]

I realise the Church will never see a perfect 20/20 vision for one another.
Heck, all families have arguments. [I come from a family of 8 kids]
Cultural distinctions play a big part and always has.
Tower of Babel ....much.

People [all of us] need to learn that the differences stem from the same teachings, but we are culturally aware to the different ways of seeing the same thing.


SO since we see something differently, we feel it is right to chastise someone who sees it from a different angle.

For instance...
A metaphoric explanation of St John the Baptist;
Saying he was born there was less light, and when Jesus was born He brought light.

In the West [America] the June month brings in shorter days, less light.
In December it brings in more light and days begin to grow...

BUT you wont see this analogy in Australia...because it is a different season and the days are different.

IT depends on the culture to which is HOW we see the same glass.
One says it is half full, the other says half empty.

St Augustine a Saint for both Churches fought hard against heresies. He won, those heresies died off.

What I do not understand is why the East cannot see the West's side.
WE try to see the side of the East...out of pure love.

Not in any way condescending...but as a 'brother' would appreciate the different personality of his younger sibling.
Same family...different POV.

UP close, under a microscope...the differences are not nearly as large as we want them to be.

I assure you it takes a willingness and utmost love to say...this is such a speck when we see one thing in two lights.

There is a BIG picture...
It is bigger than you or I..
IT is God.

WWJD??

What He already did...He wanted unity.

That is where I pray..to please Him, that the Lord's WIll be done on earth...not mine.

I love ya Michael...
And I would hope if we do disagree we can do so on the issues and not upon each other.

Let us feel the love for one another.:groupray:

WE are ONE in God's eyes.

Heck, someone showed us in another thread that a Patriarch demanded to see his equal on earth, and God showed him a woman washing her clothes...

So dont we all see what God is telling us??



:hug:
I don't have an issue with family or friends being Catholic. I do not look upon them as being heretics, or anything of that sort. Remember I grew up Catholic and my moms entire side of the family is Catholic (6 aunts and uncles, each having a minimum of 3 children a piece, etc.) and a good portion of my friends are Catholic.

What I do have an issue with is those who attempt to tell me that there is very little separating Rome from Orthodoxy. Having seen and lived both sides of the schism I can tell you there is alot more separating the two sides than anyone wants to admit.

[Michael the Iconographer]

There is no "false union" ther eis only true unity. We practice it day after day and improve it day after day by the guidence of the Holy Ghost. God raises His strong right hand and is the Healer of the humanistic ills that may occur in our unity throughout time.

The Theotokos prays for it and protects us and loves to see the growth as many blessings have been bestowed upon us! Amen!?!?
True unity based on lies and prostelytization?

[WarriorAngel]

I assure you it takes a willingness and utmost love to say...this is such a speck when we see one thing in two lights.



As long as we do not try to take each other's lights out we are progressing in unity... when we try to overshadow each other's light then we do not. I hope you do not missunderstand my comment. As Churches we both carry long long traditions.... we can always meet half way but it will not work to overshadow. And I do believe that true unity is to PRAY for each other and the whole world and we fortunately do. What else is left? The technicalities and politics of both our churches. .... and human egos may I add...

Lord have mercy

God bless,
Philothei

If Rome was awful, there would not be EC's... :hug:
IN union with, does not mean the Pope is a dictator.
Heck, if only he did have more influence on the Church today...even the Latin Rite would do better to actually give him respect.



I don't have an issue with family or friends being Catholic. I do not look upon them as being heretics, or anything of that sort. Remember I grew up Catholic and my moms entire side of the family is Catholic (6 aunts and uncles, each having a minimum of 3 children a piece, etc.) and a good portion of my friends are Catholic.

What I do have an issue with is those who attempt to tell me that there is very little separating Rome from Orthodoxy. Having seen and lived both sides of the schism I can tell you there is alot more separating the two sides than anyone wants to admit.

Ok, Michael I have a question I often dare not ask...

But being a friend, I ask you...

How much influence does Constantinople have on the East?
Since he calls himself the New Rome... why does he need to be addressed as the New Rome at all, if say, Rome had no authority at all anyway?:scratch:

And tell me what his [Patriarch] role is for the entire East... :groupray:

True unity based on lies and prostelytization?

No one here wants conversions.

WE want unity. No one here would like to see the Chairs of the Apostles fall.... but that those chairs unite to the original faith of unity.

[Epiphanygirl]

And for the record, I have never been insulted by anyone on OBOB for being EC. We have had our discussions and disagreements once or twice, but never insulted or made to feel uncomfortable. They are my family in Christ and in our One True Faith.

Love ya all!!
:hug: You've always been my buddy!.......I don't see you as any different, never have.....same with any.........I've seen more of push from the EO telling EC how different they are than anything..........I've never seen a Catholic call a EC a Uniate.....that's akin to spitting on them......also, don't the EO call them that because they never truly broke ranks with Rome to begin with?.......mmmmmmmm...think I'll go find some unbiased historical reading on this...........this thread is really sad.

[stivvy]

True unity based on lies and prostelytization?
Nope, based on the truth and love of the pre-schism church and without barriers and based on respect and loyalty to the Chair of Peter and the other Apostles that shared the same respect for Jesus the Christ's statement on unity and orders for Peter to feed His sheep.

[Epiphanygirl]

True unity based on lies and prostelytization?
Are you claiming that there were no Catholic churches in the soviet union before the wall went up? I hope not....they were there, they were just the minority. I also read that the Catholic churches that were there were granted to the the EO when the wall came down, is this true?
MI, I understand the whole prostelyzation thing, to a degree, it happens to Catholics too........but what it boils down to........God gave us free-will, is it sad when a Catholic leaves the fold........YES, same for EO.....but to deny the basic right to someone based on where they were born.........ie........you have to be EO just because you were born in a certain area is just wrong! What about this situation.....now that these countries are now open....what of the families doing business there who aren't EO? Are they to be denied access to worshiping or building their churches? Dude, you can't do that.....thats just flat out wrong.
For those who want to see what is going on check out www.forum18.org (http://www.forum18.org)

[Sothron]

Um, no. To be Eastern Catholic is to be Eastern Catholic. If you want to be Orthodox then there is a catechism class waiting for you.

I agree. You don't get to be both, sorry. :P

[Epiphanygirl]

I agree. You don't get to be both, sorry. :P
Well I disagree, and he does...so a double :P :P Just kidding!!!!
I really doesn't matter to you does it? He's not in communion with you.....and we accept him as such........is your complaint with the "Orthodox" usage?

[Sothron]

Well I disagree, and he does...so a double :P :P Just kidding!!!!
I really doesn't matter to you does it? He's not in communion with you.....and we accept him as such........is your complaint with the "Orthodox" usage?

How would you feel if a Lutheran said "Oh we're the best of both worlds, we're RCC and Protestants too"? Would you actually consider them to be RCC?

*note this is just an example, not that I am saying the Lutherans actually believe or say this.


Its actually quite simple: you don't get to call yourself a member of a church or in this case the Church and yet not agree with the actual beliefs of that church and not be in communion with the bishops of that church.

EC can be Catholics with an Eastern Rite if they want but they are not Eastern Orthodox. As I said above, you don't get to be both.

[stivvy]

It is a tough pill to swallow my friend, but we do hold to the tradition in faith, belief, liturgy, and tradition within the EC. We hold strong to our orthodox roots and practice them. That can never be taken away from us. We also recognize the Chair of Peter and embrace the leadership of the church. So as you see, it is being done in the EC.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Are you claiming that there were no Catholic churches in the soviet union before the wall went up? I hope not....they were there, they were just the minority. I also read that the Catholic churches that were there were granted to the the EO when the wall came down, is this true?
MI, I understand the whole prostelyzation thing, to a degree, it happens to Catholics too........but what it boils down to........God gave us free-will, is it sad when a Catholic leaves the fold........YES, same for EO.....but to deny the basic right to someone based on where they were born.........ie........you have to be EO just because you were born in a certain area is just wrong! What about this situation.....now that these countries are now open....what of the families doing business there who aren't EO? Are they to be denied access to worshiping or building their churches? Dude, you can't do that.....thats just flat out wrong.
For those who want to see what is going on check out www.forum18.org (http://www.forum18.org)
No I am saying there were no Eastern Catholics in Russia and the Ukraine prior to the Jesuit prostelytization of Russia and the Ukraine in the 17th Century.

[Michael the Iconographer]

If Rome was awful, there would not be EC's... :hug:
IN union with, does not mean the Pope is a dictator.
Heck, if only he did have more influence on the Church today...even the Latin Rite would do better to actually give him respect.





Ok, Michael I have a question I often dare not ask...

But being a friend, I ask you...

How much influence does Constantinople have on the East?
Since he calls himself the New Rome... why does he need to be addressed as the New Rome at all, if say, Rome had no authority at all anyway?:scratch:

And tell me what his [Patriarch] role is for the entire East... :groupray:



No one here wants conversions.

WE want unity. No one here would like to see the Chairs of the Apostles fall.... but that those chairs unite to the original faith of unity.
Really? No one wants conversions? And that is why the Moscow Patriarch won't have an audience with the Pope because there to this day is prostelytization going on in Russia. I should really stop coming over here before the comments here incense me. The Moscow Patriarch has made it perfectly clear the Catholic Church needs to stop sheep stealing in Russia, and yet it has not. No one wants conversions? I do not believe a word of that.

[Michael the Iconographer]

If Rome was awful, there would not be EC's... :hug:
IN union with, does not mean the Pope is a dictator.
Heck, if only he did have more influence on the Church today...even the Latin Rite would do better to actually give him respect.





Ok, Michael I have a question I often dare not ask...

But being a friend, I ask you...

How much influence does Constantinople have on the East?
Since he calls himself the New Rome... why does he need to be addressed as the New Rome at all, if say, Rome had no authority at all anyway?:scratch:

And tell me what his [Patriarch] role is for the entire East... :groupray:



No one here wants conversions.

WE want unity. No one here would like to see the Chairs of the Apostles fall.... but that those chairs unite to the original faith of unity.
Constantinople calls itself the new Rome because that was the title given to it when it was founded as a city in the 4th century. The title has nothing to do at all with the Papacy, or desire to be Papal or anything like that. It is purely a historical title. The Ecumenical Patriarch has as much influence over the Orthodox Church as any other bishop, and no more. The only time his position of Ecumenical Patriarch has meaning is when he is the head of his local synod of bishops or when he is the head of an Ecumenical Council. He does not have anything near the authority which Rome has given itself. All bishops within Orthodoxy are equal and the title of Patriach or Primate simply means the given bishop sits at the head of his local synod of bishops, nothing more.

[stivvy]

Still waiting.....

I wrote this waaaay back on page 25 to zhilan...

I ask you this.

Do you recognize the apostletic succession of our Catholic priests?

Are our Catholic sacraments valid and true?

Is the Holy Ghost working through the office of Peter through the Pontiff?

Let's see if you even respond.

[xristos.anesti]

Unfortunately, it seems that at this stage - there is nothing that we can talk about without absolute denial of others side views -

this is resulting in heated tempers and offensive behaviour -

thus for the sake of all our souls - I suggest that this thread receives a closure -

I believe that all of us should learn what denigration of others is achieving (in a negative sense) -

Lord have mercy -

Look at us o' Lord - the barking and spitting murderers of our brothers - and we call ourselves the children of God.

[WarriorAngel]

Really? No one wants conversions? And that is why the Moscow Patriarch won't have an audience with the Pope because there to this day is prostelytization going on in Russia. I should really stop coming over here before the comments here incense me. The Moscow Patriarch has made it perfectly clear the Catholic Church needs to stop sheep stealing in Russia, and yet it has not. No one wants conversions? I do not believe a word of that.

Well, I didnt know the CC used guns to convert ppl.

Conversion is free will.
The Patriarch no more owns the ppl than the Catholic Church does.

BUT how come Constantinople closed all the CC in 1054?
Scratched the Pope's name off the list of Patriarchs, threw in a red herring about the Filioque [years after the fact] and then lied to/made a case of false heresy claims to the other Patriarchs to get them to follow HIS Authority?

Who were all distressed at their own conditions to follow thru in any argument.
HOW COME the rightful Patriarch [in earlier years] was 'forced' into stepping down, but when he pleaded with help from Rome, the new Patriarch covered it all up claiming he stepped down?

IN the CC that is called an anti pope. And we wouldnt stand for it.

How come nothing was done about that?







Constantinople calls itself the new Rome because that was the title given to it when it was founded as a city in the 4th century. The title has nothing to do at all with the Papacy, or desire to be Papal or anything like that. It is purely a historical title. The Ecumenical Patriarch has as much influence over the Orthodox Church as any other bishop, and no more. The only time his position of Ecumenical Patriarch has meaning is when he is the head of his local synod of bishops or when he is the head of an Ecumenical Council. He does not have anything near the authority which Rome has given itself. All bishops within Orthodoxy are equal and the title of Patriach or Primate simply means the given bishop sits at the head of his local synod of bishops, nothing more.

O contrare mon friar. [sp]
First among equals was given titlement to Constantinople.... upon a local council, ignoring the Pope and his input.

SO just because Constantinople claimed that right, did not mean it was his right.

Here is some info (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04301a.htm)

I am sorry Michael. I see you saying such flammatory things, which I do not blame you for, because you have been taught to feel that way.

But in the CC we have never been been taught to hate, ostracize or otherwise defame our brethren of the EO.

How come you guys are taught all of this, but the CC doesnt do that?

I have never been sat down by a priest and told how awful the EO is.

IT is the show of our fruits, I think. Lately I have been pondering that. The CC doesnt fear the EO enough to teach these things.
SO I had to go out and find the history.

The CC is hated by all... :( And yet she doesnt teach hatred of others.

[stivvy]

Unfortunately, it seems that at this stage - there is nothing that we can talk about without absolute denial of others side views -

this is resulting in heated tempers and offensive behaviour -

thus for the sake of all our souls - I suggest that this thread receives a closure -

I believe that all of us should learn what denigration of others is achieving (in a negative sense) -

Lord have mercy -

Look at us o' Lord - the barking and spitting murderers of our brothers - and we call ourselves the children of God.
I disagree. I want my question answered before you close it. This site does this all the time and closes things to avoid answering legit questions.

[xristos.anesti]

I disagree. I want my question answered before you close it. This site does this all the time and closes things to avoid answering legit questions.
Brother, you can disagree - it is your choice - and this is democracy -

I am not engaging into any of this any more -

I need no more sins to be added to my daily tallies -

Many years.

[Anhelyna]

I'm out of this too.

I'm disgusted :(

I'm angry :mad:

Κύριε Ιησού Χριστέ, Υιέ του Θεού, ελέησόν με τον αμαρτωλόν.

Господи Ісусе Христе, Сину Божий, помилуй мене грішного.

Doamne Iisuse Hristoase, Fiul lui Dumnezeu, miluieşte-mă pe mine păcătosul.

Seigneur Jésus Christ, Fils du Dieu, aie pitié de moi pécheur.

[Sothron]

It is a tough pill to swallow my friend, but we do hold to the tradition in faith, belief, liturgy, and tradition within the EC. We hold strong to our orthodox roots and practice them. That can never be taken away from us. We also recognize the Chair of Peter and embrace the leadership of the church. So as you see, it is being done in the EC.

No, actually, it is not.

Let me make this simple: if your bishop(s) are not recognized and in communion with our bishops then you aren't EO.

Claiming to be when you don't actually hold to all the tenets of the EO is disrespectful to EO members. You do not see us masquerading as another faith. I am not belitting your faith or what your denomination does. But it is not Orthodox.

[stivvy]

We are holding to the tenents of the orthodox church as it stood with the catholic church prior to the Schism. How much more orthodox can we be in regards to it. We are not trying to steal any faith. We are what we are. We are the Eastern church, under the unity with Rome and hold the tenents that are pre-schism.

[Globalnomad]

Leave it be, Stivvy. This thread has become evil. We'll have a chance to discuss some other day, on another thread.

Let's rather go say a prayer.

[stivvy]

I still would like my questions answered. This hasn't become evil. It is a legit discussion and there are many questions out there that have gotten answered on both sides. But there are a few still needing answered.

Just because someone doesn't like an answer given and throws a huffy over it, doesn't make it evil. Jesus gave the pharisees many answers they didn't like either, but he wasn't called evil.

Love you all!

[Anhelyna]

Unfortunately, it seems that at this stage - there is nothing that we can talk about without absolute denial of others side views -

this is resulting in heated tempers and offensive behaviour -

thus for the sake of all our souls - I suggest that this thread receives a closure -

I believe that all of us should learn what denigration of others is achieving (in a negative sense) -

Lord have mercy -

Look at us o' Lord - the barking and spitting murderers of our brothers - and we call ourselves the children of God.
Blasted Rep Nazis :(

[Yeznik]

Well, I didnt know the CC used guns to convert ppl.

Conversion is free will.
The Patriarch no more owns the ppl than the Catholic Church does.

BUT how come Constantinople closed all the CC in 1054?
Scratched the Pope's name off the list of Patriarchs, threw in a red herring about the Filioque [years after the fact] and then lied to/made a case of false heresy claims to the other Patriarchs to get them to follow HIS Authority?

Who were all distressed at their own conditions to follow thru in any argument.
HOW COME the rightful Patriarch [in earlier years] was 'forced' into stepping down, but when he pleaded with help from Rome, the new Patriarch covered it all up claiming he stepped down?

IN the CC that is called an anti pope. And we wouldnt stand for it.

How come nothing was done about that?









O contrare mon friar. [sp]
First among equals was given titlement to Constantinople.... upon a local council, ignoring the Pope and his input.

SO just because Constantinople claimed that right, did not mean it was his right.

Here is some info (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04301a.htm)

I am sorry Michael. I see you saying such flammatory things, which I do not blame you for, because you have been taught to feel that way.

But in the CC we have never been been taught to hate, ostracize or otherwise defame our brethren of the EO.

How come you guys are taught all of this, but the CC doesnt do that?

I have never been sat down by a priest and told how awful the EO is.

IT is the show of our fruits, I think. Lately I have been pondering that. The CC doesnt fear the EO enough to teach these things.
SO I had to go out and find the history.

The CC is hated by all... :( And yet she doesnt teach hatred of others.

Quick question, would you consider the Patriarch of Constantinople, an anti-pope since the RCC didn't agree with the position in the 5th century?

[Punchy]

I don't understand how this thread could continue as it has. If you honestly want to learn who Eastern Catholics are and what they believe, I'd recommend joining the Byz Cath forum.

http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/cfrm

I'm sorry to anyone I've hurt or offended.

[Philothei]

If you honestly want to learn who Eastern Catholics are and what they believe, I'd recommend joining the Byz Cath forum.

As many told you before (who were already EC members) we already know your position as some of us hold degrees and such.... in theology from legitemate schools....lol...but realy no offense here.
Thank you and God bless you. Lord have mercy on us all. Let me get this straighte,you want us to learn about EC while we are EO right? Just thinking aloud here.

again may the Lord have mercy on us :( , that one day we are all will be One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church united under our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Philothei

[zhilan]

Again, repeating the same points over and over again has gotten tiresome. I'd recommend sharing your questions and concerns in the Byz Cath forum, to people more knowledgeable and patient than I am.

I already told you, I've been on Byz Cath and talked to people there. But the very most basic thing to being Catholic is believing in the dogmas of the Church. If you do not, you are not Catholic.

[Da_Funkey_Gibbon]

I already told you, I've been on Byz Cath and talked to people there. But the very most basic thing to being Catholic is believing in the dogmas of the Church. If you do not, you are not Catholic.
Says who?

You're just not a good Catholic.

[zhilan]

You do not listen at all. You just pass over answers. I answered these points way back explaining the infalibility and you never responded to it, because you are just out to cause contriversy.

I ask you this.

Do you recognize the apostletic succession of our Catholic priests?

Are our sacriments valid and true?

Is the Holy Ghost workign through the office of Peter through the Pontiff?

Let's see if you even respond.

I have answered, and I get different answers every time. It has been maid painfully clear to me in OBOB that in order to be considered Catholic you must accept the infallible teachings of the Church. I have also been told by ECs here, such as Puncy that they do not accept the infallible teachings of the Church. So which is it?

No one will give me a clear answer. Half the people insist ECs do believe in the dogmas of the Church, the other half insist they do now. All I want is a clear answer.

And in answers to your question I don't know if Catholic Sacraments are valid, I don't know if the succession is valid, and I don't know if the Holy Spirit is working through the chair of Peter and I don't care. We know where the Church is we don't know where it is not. Who am I to limit the Holy Spirit? But I hope that you believe in them and I support you in that. What I don't understand is why you have people insisting they do not believe in anything that makes one Catholic, but insisting that they are in fact Catholic.

[zhilan]

1) I'm not offended by the "two lung" idea, so long as the two lungs are the EC and the LR Catholics. I think it's just dandy.

2) I don't think the EC's are "subordinate" to Rome or if they are, I don't have any experience with that, and I would leave that to them to decide.

3) I don't care whether the EC's are "traitors" or "unites" or whatever insults they are something called. I don't care if they rejoined with Rome for theological or political reasons. And I don't care that some of them never left.

4) I don't care if Rome things they are the "bridge" to bring Orthodoxy to Rome anymore than if Pentecostals thinks music is a "bridge" to bring people to Christ. It doesn't affect me, it has nothing to do with me, it doesn't offend me. Obviously Rome wants Orthodox to come back. That doesn't offend me anymore than it offends me that Orthodox hope others will convert to Orthodoxy.

5) I'm not offended that Rome evangelizes in Orthodox countries. At least from my personal experience Orthodox have no trouble bringing Catholics into the Church. We believe we are the True Church so why would we not want Catholics to become Orthodox? I assume the same is true for Catholics. I think if we are worried about it we should catechize our flock rather than chasing after missionaries. So long as it's not being done by force, then I'm not offended. Maybe sad if someone converts, but I don't blame you and it doesn't offend me.

6) It has been many very very very clear to me by Catholics that you must believe in the dogmas of the Catholic Church to be Catholic. I posted a thread in OBOB asking this question and pretty much everyone said that if you don't believe in Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception you are not in Communion with Rome and may well be in mortal sin.

7) The Orthodox Church does not believe that one can be Orthodox while holding those views.

8) I have been told by Latin Rite members in this thread that Eastern Rite Catholics do accept Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception, and thus by Eastern Orthodox standards they would not be considered Orthodox.

9) Following on the last point, it was also clarified that the Eastern Rite believe that these beliefs make them part of the more ancient truths (ie prior to the Schism Eastern Orthodox also held the views of Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate Conception). Thus they see themselves as "Orthodox" because they see their views as representing the more traditional view. If this is the case, then while I don't agree with you, I totally understand and have not issue with that.

10) Other Eastern Rite Catholics on this thread have made the opposite claim, saying that they in fact do not hold the views that other members claimed they did. They claim that they do not believe in Papal Infallibility or the Immaculate Conception. In this case, according to what has been made clear to me in other threads and consistently throughout my Catholic upbringing that they are placing themselves outside Communion with Rome.

11) I've tried to ask for clarification over and over, but people tell me they already answered without explaining the apparent contradictions.

12) I'm not looking for conflict or trouble, I have read all the responses, I have been to Byz Catholic, I have talked to Eastern Catholic priests, I have read much of the Catechism. I would just like this to be explained to me.

Thanks and God Bless.

[zhilan]

Says who?

You're just not a good Catholic.
Yes, well that's correct. =)

[Epiphanygirl]

wow.....that's an aweful lot of "I don't care" zhilan, you 're on a board and getting "differing answers"..........maybe becuase what some are spouting are opinions rather than tenants or dogmas of the faith.........
You know us Catholics, we write everything down and stick to it....this keeps us from skirting the issues;) .....if you wanna know about the EC's look on the vatican website or an EC website that can lead you through the proclaimations and such.........but thats if you really wanna know..........otherwise quit complaining about getting different answers...it just becomes hot air.

[stivvy]

I have answered, and I get different answers every time. It has been maid painfully clear to me in OBOB that in order to be considered Catholic you must accept the infallible teachings of the Church. I have also been told by ECs here, such as Puncy that they do not accept the infallible teachings of the Church. So which is it?

And we are clear in saying we do believe in the infallibility teachings of the church. I also defined, very clearly that you are misunderstanding the definaition of the infallibility of the Pontiff. It is of what he approves as church dogma, not his weather reports. It is about infallibility of that which he defines as church law on an official basis. If it were not so, then the law would be fallible and it couldn'tbe of the Holy Ghost Himself.

Punchy never said EC don't accept the infallible teachings of the church. The EC may practie them differently or not participate in them, but we never deny the infallible teachings of the church. Show me where it is that we do.

...And in answers to your question I don't know if Catholic Sacraments are valid, I don't know if the succession is valid, and I don't know if the Holy Spirit is working through the chair of Peter and I don't care. We know where the Church is we don't know where it is not. Who am I to limit the Holy Spirit? But I hope that you believe in them and I support you in that. What I don't understand is why you have people insisting they do not believe in anything that makes one Catholic, but insisting that they are in fact Catholic.
Is it just me or are you skirting the questions.

Let me do it for you.

If you are true EO then you...

1.) Must accept that the Catholic priests are not of true apostletic succession and have no power to perform in the name of the Jesus the Christ.
2.) Must accept that the Catholic sacraments are false. Thus you having to go through EO "chrismassion". Cannot go to confession to a Catholic Priest, cannot get married in a catholic church, etc etc etc...
3.) Must deny any succession of the leadership role of Peter passed down through his chair that the Pontiff now is seated in and was chosen through prayer and guidence of the Holy Ghost. His declarartions in official church business and law are not of the Holy Ghost because if they were, his guidence by the Holy Ghost cannot be fallible in church matters.

There, aren''t you so proud of being part of such a loving and accepting brotherhood. I am sure the original church fathers (all of which are orthodox) would be so proud of what the EO is today. It is my opinion they would be more proud of how the EC is today. IMHO.

Love you all!

[stivvy]

You know your "I don't care" statements go against your Orthodox study bible that I use. You can find where it states on page xxviii the Nine ways of participating in another's sin. Yours falls under number 8 (By Silence) and by number 9 (By defense of the sin commited). By not caring you have denied the Orthodox laws, so how can you call yourself orthodox. You either follow their laws and their rules of denying the points made above about the Catholic Church or turn around and ask yourself the same questions you have been repeating over and over again here about how you can have your cake and eat it too.

love you all!

[zhilan]

wow.....that's an aweful lot of "I don't care" zhilan, you 're on a board and getting "differing answers"..........maybe becuase what some are spouting are opinions rather than tenants or dogmas of the faith.........
You know us Catholics, we write everything down and stick to it....this keeps us from skirting the issues;) .....if you wanna know about the EC's look on the vatican website or an EC website that can lead you through the proclaimations and such.........but thats if you really wanna know..........otherwise quit complaining about getting different answers...it just becomes hot air.
I want to know the Catholic stance!

[zhilan]

And we are clear in saying we do believe in the infallibility teachings of the church. I also defined, very clearly that you are misunderstanding the definaition of the infallibility of the Pontiff. It is of what he approves as church dogma, not his weather reports. It is about infallibility of that which he defines as church law on an official basis. If it were not so, then the law would be fallible and it couldn'tbe of the Holy Ghost Himself.

Ok, if that is the case then that's cool. :thumbsup:

Your fellow EC Puncy was insisting that EC's do not believe in it. Which caused my confusion.


Punchy never said EC don't accept the infallible teachings of the church. The EC may practie them differently or not participate in them, but we never deny the infallible teachings of the church. Show me where it is that we do.


I'll check back but I'm pretty sure he directly stated ECs do not believe in the infallible teachings of the Church.

Is it just me or are you skirting the questions.

Let me do it for you.

I wasn't trying to.

If you are true EO then you...

1.) Must accept that the Catholic priests are not of true apostletic succession and have no power to perform in the name of the Jesus the Christ.

Wrong. The Orthodox Church takes no position. It will not say that the sacraments are correct since we are not in communion. It will also not say that they are not, since we do not know where the Holy Spirit ends. As the classic answer, we know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not. So now, the Orthodox Church does not state they are invalid, but they will not state that they are either.

2.) Must accept that the Catholic sacraments are false. Thus you having to go through EO "chrismassion". Cannot go to confession to a Catholic Priest, cannot get married in a catholic church, etc etc etc...

I already answered this. We do not state they are false. We just do not know if they are true. So the Orthodox Church says pretty much the same thing as I said. We don't know....and it's doesn't affect our Church. We cannot place limits on God.

3.) Must deny any succession of the leadership role of Peter passed down through his chair that the Pontiff now is seated in and was chosen through prayer and guidence of the Holy Ghost. His declarartions in official church business and law are not of the Holy Ghost because if they were, his guidence by the Holy Ghost cannot be fallible in church matters.


Again incorrect. We believe in the Chair of Peter and we believe in Papal Primacy. What we reject is the idea of Papal Infallibility or Supremacy. Prior to the Schism, obviously, Rome held a Primacy of Honor and was first among equals, we can't, and don't wish to deny that.

There, aren''t you so proud of being part of such a loving and accepting brotherhood. I am sure the original church fathers (all of which are orthodox) would be so proud of what the EO is today. It is my opinion they would be more proud of how the EC is today. IMHO.


Well obviously there we agree to disagree. I think the Early Church Fathers would be sad on all accounts to see what Christianity has become today. I am proud of the Orthodox Church. It is the most beautiful thing in the world to me and it has shown me God in a way I never knew before. I would assume you feel the same about the EC. I don't have a problem with that. When I'm not debating on CF you'd be surprised at how "live and let live" I am. :cool:

[nestoj]

Orthodox have nothing against EC, for us they are exactly what their name says – Roman Catholics (in communion with Bishop of Rome) of eastern rite. Maybe they see things differently, but that’s their choice. Of course we find bunch of wonderful people among them and their worship is similar to ours, but we also find bunch of wonderful people among “True Ultra-Mega-Giga Orthodox” and their worship is VERY similar to ours, but that doesn’t mean that they are part of the EO – it means that they are EC in one case or that they are SomeChurch in communion with WhoTheySeeFit in other – both have no connections with EO. It doesn’t work if you say “Let’s see… Let me drop what I don’t like with crazy Orthodox and call that a real-true Orthodox” – and I get a feeling both groups are doing this very thing – which I thought is a behavior common only for Protestants… If you are in communion with canonical EO then you are part of the EO (either eastern or western rite), if you are in communion with RCC then you are part of the RCC (either eastern or latin rite)… simple – you take what you like together with what you don’t like or you are part of neither.

Anyway, I don’t think that most of the EC will claim that they are EO in communion with Roman Bishop (and if they do – we don’t see them as part of us), and I don’t see a reason to be bothered by RC’s using eastern worship – if they feel more comfortable with that, then they should use it.

nestoj
God helps

[isshinwhat]

Regarding the official stance of the Eastern Churches with respect to the Immaculate Conception, perhaps this will help:

http://ukrcathedral.com/thumbs/insidexmas_thumb.jpg

http://ukrcathedral.com/thumbs/outsidecathedral_thumb.jpg

They are pictures of the Ukrainian Catholic Cathedral of the Imamculate Conception in Philadelphia. The Ukrainian Catholic Church is the largest Eastern Catholic Church sui juris .

[zhilan]

Regarding the official stance of the Eastern Churches with respect to the Immaculate Conception, perhaps this will help:

http://ukrcathedral.com/thumbs/insidexmas_thumb.jpg

http://ukrcathedral.com/thumbs/outsidecathedral_thumb.jpg

They are pictures of the Ukrainian Catholic Cathedral of the Imamculate Conception in Philadelphia. The Ukrainian Catholic Church is the largest Eastern Catholic Church sui juris .
Can you link the site so we can see a bigger picture? My eyes aren't good enough. =(

[isshinwhat]

http://www.ukrcathedralphiladelphia.net/

Oops... I thought I did...

[AMDG]

Gosh darn it! Don't you see that y'all are getting hung up on words and forgetting the concepts behind the words? The Immaculate Conception simply states that Mary was conceived without Original Sin--which is not to say "original guilt" but only to say that there is a lack of the holiness that would permit one to be at one with God. (The Eastern mind never felt compelled to define each little thing--like Augustine did for the West, so of course they'd have the "lacking ability to be one with God without the definition of Original Sin.) Now about the IC, the Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God the all-holy or "Panagia". The Easter Fathers celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature". Compare the the concepts not the words. Now as far as the infallibility of the Pope--what is being said is that the Holy Spirit protects the person (and successors) of the one Jesus chose (as primary leader, but not negating the authority of the Bishops) in teaching His Church. It's a very narrow concept in that should the Pope stray speaking traditional faith and morals to the Church then he's no longer protected. Is the EO saying that the Holy Spirit doesn't protect their Church from error? Again, check the concepts not the words.

Now here I would like to address the words orthodox (small "o") and Orthodox (capital "O"). Orthodox (small "o" means "adhering to the accepted or traditional and established faith". While Orthodox (capital "O") means the body of churches derived from the church of the Byzantine Empire and acknowledging the Byzantine rite an primacy of the patriarch of Constantinople." While it stands to reason that the Eastern Catholic Rites are not Orthodox (capital "O") simply because they are Catholic, they would be orthodox (small "o") because they hold "accepted and traditional and established faith".

By not checking the concepts behind the words being tossed around, you have, IMO, "a tempest in a teapot".

[Sothron]

There, aren''t you so proud of being part of such a loving and accepting brotherhood. I am sure the original church fathers (all of which are orthodox) would be so proud of what the EO is today. It is my opinion they would be more proud of how the EC is today. IMHO.

Love you all!

Is this level of rudeness and hostility really necessary? You really think the ECF would be proud of your pride in this post?

I think they would be ashamed at the current state of the Church. IMHO.

I left in your "love you all!" statement because reading that post and the one under it where you attack zhilan personally I realize you are only adding it as some kind of sarcastic zinger.

I guess the ECF would proud of that too. :crosseo:

[WarriorAngel]

Quick question, would you consider the Patriarch of Constantinople, an anti-pope since the RCC didn't agree with the position in the 5th century?

I would consider that the one who removed the original one to take his place to definitely be an anti patriarch.

I also believe that the EO are somewhat hypocritical in that they scream loudly about the filioque, but the Pope who was excluded from the 'New Rome' concept, was not an issue whatsoever for them.

If you are going to scream heresy, you have to be sure your own eyes are not covered with logs.

I have answered, and I get different answers every time. It has been maid painfully clear to me in OBOB that in order to be considered Catholic you must accept the infallible teachings of the Church. I have also been told by ECs here, such as Puncy that they do not accept the infallible teachings of the Church. So which is it?

No one will give me a clear answer. Half the people insist ECs do believe in the dogmas of the Church, the other half insist they do now. All I want is a clear answer.

And in answers to your question I don't know if Catholic Sacraments are valid, I don't know if the succession is valid, and I don't know if the Holy Spirit is working through the chair of Peter and I don't care. We know where the Church is we don't know where it is not. Who am I to limit the Holy Spirit? But I hope that you believe in them and I support you in that. What I don't understand is why you have people insisting they do not believe in anything that makes one Catholic, but insisting that they are in fact Catholic.

The EC have the best of both worlds.

The pre schism unity with Peter's chair, and the cultural faith of the East.

Whether you like that or not, it still shows that they have one up on the current EO...
They are united to Peter's Chair as the first Church was...Which is truly how the ancient Church was.

[WarriorAngel]

Is this level of rudeness and hostility really necessary? You really think the ECF would be proud of your pride in this post?

I think they would be ashamed at the current state of the Church. IMHO.

I left in your "love you all!" statement because reading that post and the one under it where you attack zhilan personally I realize you are only adding it as some kind of sarcastic zinger.

I guess the ECF would proud of that too. :crosseo:

It has come to my attention that everyone has some guilt in this.

I am not necessarily excluded. But I am speaking on generalities, not personal attacks.

[WarriorAngel]

http://www.ukrcathedralphiladelphia.net/

Oops... I thought I did...

:cool:

[WarriorAngel]

Personal level attacks and flames will not be allowed to remain.

If this does not stop, we will have to close this thread.

[Punchy]

I agree with the Patriarch of Constantinople when he stated that his jurisdiction is universal in his own sphere, just as the Pope is universal in the world. That would mean that as the Pope is first among all bishops, while nonetheless an equal to them, the Constantinople Patriarch is first in the East.

There is a discussion in the Byz Cath forum on this matter:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/249521/fpart/1

[Philothei]

I agree with the Patriarch of Constantinople when he stated that his jurisdiction is universal in his own sphere, just as the Pope is universal in the world. That would mean that as the Pope is first among all bishops, while nonetheless an equal to them, the Constantinople Patriarch is first in the East.

There is a discussion in the Byz Cath forum on this matter:
http://www.byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/249521/fpart/1


:bow: :bow: :bow:

Is that the oficial RC postition on the Patriarch? ^_^ :doh:

I am afraid not.


God bless,
Philothei

[Punchy]

:bow: :bow: :bow:

Is that the oficial RC postition on the Patriarch? ^_^ :doh:


It's the official pre-schism position.

[Punchy]

Given the recent revisions made in the Byzantine Catholic liturgy, I don't know how long I could last before leaving for an Eastern Orthodox Church. The liturgy is what drew me to Eastern Christianity in the first place, not Popemobiles.

[Assisi]

:bow: :bow: :bow:

Is that the oficial RC postition on the Patriarch? ^_^ :doh:

I am afraid not.


God bless,
Philothei

Would you mind explaining this a bit more? Do you mean that That would mean that as the Pope is first among all bishops, while nonetheless an equal to them
is not the Catholic position? Or thatConstantinople Patriarch is first in the Eastis not the Catholic position??

[Irish Melkite]

Given the recent revisions made in the Byzantine Catholic liturgy, I don't know how long I could last before leaving for an Eastern Orthodox Church. The liturgy is what drew me to Eastern Christianity in the first place, not Popemobiles.

Matthew,

This is what it all comes down to, isn't it?

We've known one another for about 3 or 4 years now, since I first encountered you at OC.net. Your story then was of being a cradle Catholic by parents who were
Latin Catholic (mother) and Greek Orthodox (father). You were raised Catholic and, subsequently, entered communion with the Syro-Malankara Jacobite (Orthodox) Church. That was the situation then.

You went on to publicly speculate about the prospects of entering the Benedictines, because doing so would afford you an opportunity to obtain an advanced degree and enjoy the prestige of teaching at the university level. You were unfazed by the problem that to do so would necessitate lying, either overtly or by omission, about your religious beliefs and Church membership. And, you were aghast at the suggestion by me and others that your proposed charade suggested a spiritual immaturity and a lack of commitment to the tenets of either Church. You were, in effect, willing to seek and obtain faculties as a Catholic priest, while holding internally to the doctrinal beliefs of an Oriental Orthodox, all for the sake of prestige.

And, you weren't done. You followed up, not long thereafter, with a new scheme - to seek entry to the Russian Orthodox monastic community at Vashon Island. Again, you were nonplussed by the inherent differences between your beliefs as an Oriental Orthodox Christian and those of the monastic brotherhood there as Eastern Orthodox Christians. The same firestorm erupted over this suggestion that you would effectively lie to obtain what Matthew wanted - regardless of whom Matthew claimed to be and believe, spiritually and theologically. The same among us at OC.net, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, Latin and Eastern Catholic, again expressed our amazement that you were so spiritually shallow as to consider such a course and so emotionally immature as to present it to others and not see it for the foolishness that it represented.

I think the scariest aspect of the entire scenario to all of us was that you couldn't even be described as synchretistic. It wasn't that you saw no differences between Oriental Orthodoxy, Latin Catholicism, and Eastern Orthodoxy. If you could have argued that, we might have all shaken our heads and just walked away from the matter. But, no, you saw and recognized the differences, but nothing was about that - it was all about Matthew and his personal fulfillment.

Now, time has passed and you've left the Syro-Malankara in a pique of personal affront, having found that an unfortunate, but relatively minor, scandal involving your priest so offended your moral sensibilities that you could no longer continue in that Church. Your leap to the Byzantine Ruthenians (if, indeed, you ever formally made it) may have been prompted by geographic proximity (not a lot of Eastern Catholic Church options in the Pacific Northwest) or by the fact that it was the ecclesia that had earlier disciplined the man who subsequently became a Syro-Malankara priest.

But, you're not done yet - the revisions to the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom introduced by the Council of Hierarchs of the Byzantine Metropolia - they are your new excuse to move on.

You prattle on, at great length, about Eastern Christianity, Catholic and Orthodox, yet you know little of it - parroting words and phrases that you picked up in the course of the years during which Dustin, Phil, and Robert put up with you at OC.net. You take these things out of context and toss them out there, inciting ridiculously long threads like this one that draw folks in and pit them against one another for the sake of your intellectual amusement. By my reckoning, Matthew, you are now about ready to graduate college but you are, by no means, any more ready to deal with life than you were a few years ago, as a recent high school grad. You need to seriously consider getting some sound spiritual direction, discovering what you actually believe (and to do that, you'll need to first discover what you actually know and understand of the various belief systems to which you've been prepared to attach yourself, willy-nilly, over these past few years), as well as some real-life direction, to understand and deal with your maturation issues. You cannot, btw, achieve either in an internet venue; for folks such as you, these kinds of fora are the worst possible places in which to explore spirituality and theology.

To date, your spiritual journey is not an odyssey, but a soap opera. Stop dragging the rest of the world through it. It really is time for this thread to close.

You'll be in my prayers.

Many years,

Neil

[Anhelyna]

I know I said I was out of this

BUT
Having seen Punchy/geoduck pride/ Matthew 777 /Libertarian's posts here and on Byzcath , OCNet, Catholic Answers Forum I find I have to agree with my Irish Melkite Brother here

Prayers are offered that Punchy etc will eventually find a spiritual home where he is comfortable and stays.

MODS - PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD

[Sothron]

So this whole thread was just an excuse for some spiritually confused person to pit RCC, EC and EO against one another for their personal amusement? :confused:

[Michael the Iconographer]

Matthew,

This is what it all comes down to, isn't it?

We've known one another for about 3 or 4 years now, since I first encountered you at OC.net. Your story then was of being a cradle Catholic by parents who were
Latin Catholic (mother) and Greek Orthodox (father). You were raised Catholic and, subsequently, entered communion with the Syro-Malankara Jacobite (Orthodox) Church. That was the situation then.

You went on to publicly speculate about the prospects of entering the Benedictines, because doing so would afford you an opportunity to obtain an advanced degree and enjoy the prestige of teaching at the university level. You were unfazed by the problem that to do so would necessitate lying, either overtly or by omission, about your religious beliefs and Church membership. And, you were aghast at the suggestion by me and others that your proposed charade suggested a spiritual immaturity and a lack of commitment to the tenets of either Church. You were, in effect, willing to seek and obtain faculties as a Catholic priest, while holding internally to the doctrinal beliefs of an Oriental Orthodox, all for the sake of prestige.

And, you weren't done. You followed up, not long thereafter, with a new scheme - to seek entry to the Russian Orthodox monastic community at Vashon Island. Again, you were nonplussed by the inherent differences between your beliefs as an Oriental Orthodox Christian and those of the monastic brotherhood there as Eastern Orthodox Christians. The same firestorm erupted over this suggestion that you would effectively lie to obtain what Matthew wanted - regardless of whom Matthew claimed to be and believe, spiritually and theologically. The same among us at OC.net, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, Latin and Eastern Catholic, again expressed our amazement that you were so spiritually shallow as to consider such a course and so emotionally immature as to present it to others and not see it for the foolishness that it represented.

I think the scariest aspect of the entire scenario to all of us was that you couldn't even be described as synchretistic. It wasn't that you saw no differences between Oriental Orthodoxy, Latin Catholicism, and Eastern Orthodoxy. If you could have argued that, we might have all shaken our heads and just walked away from the matter. But, no, you saw and recognized the differences, but nothing was about that - it was all about Matthew and his personal fulfillment.

Now, time has passed and you've left the Syro-Malankara in a pique of personal affront, having found that an unfortunate, but relatively minor, scandal involving your priest so offended your moral sensibilities that you could no longer continue in that Church. Your leap to the Byzantine Ruthenians (if, indeed, you ever formally made it) may have been prompted by geographic proximity (not a lot of Eastern Catholic Church options in the Pacific Northwest) or by the fact that it was the ecclesia that had earlier disciplined the man who subsequently became a Syro-Malankara priest.

But, you're not done yet - the revisions to the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom introduced by the Council of Hierarchs of the Byzantine Metropolia - they are your new excuse to move on.

You prattle on, at great length, about Eastern Christianity, Catholic and Orthodox, yet you know little of it - parroting words and phrases that you picked up in the course of the years during which Dustin, Phil, and Robert put up with you at OC.net. You take these things out of context and toss them out there, inciting ridiculously long threads like this one that draw folks in and pit them against one another for the sake of your intellectual amusement. By my reckoning, Matthew, you are now about ready to graduate college but you are, by no means, any more ready to deal with life than you were a few years ago, as a recent high school grad. You need to seriously consider getting some sound spiritual direction, discovering what you actually believe (and to do that, you'll need to first discover what you actually know and understand of the various belief systems to which you've been prepared to attach yourself, willy-nilly, over these past few years), as well as some real-life direction, to understand and deal with your maturation issues. You cannot, btw, achieve either in an internet venue; for folks such as you, these kinds of fora are the worst possible places in which to explore spirituality and theology.

To date, your spiritual journey is not an odyssey, but a soap opera. Stop dragging the rest of the world through it. It really is time for this thread to close.

You'll be in my prayers.

Many years,

Neil
One conversion from one faith to another in ones life time is a spiritual journey, but hopping from faith to faith multiple times is mere confusion and lack of spiritual direction in ones life.

[Michael the Iconographer]

So this whole thread was just an excuse for some spiritually confused person to pit RCC, EC and EO against one another for their personal amusement? :confused:
That is what it looks like. A game for one demented persons amusement.

[kamikat]

closed for staff review