Posted on 12/02/2005 8:34:54 AM PST by sionnsar
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. Benefict is doing so with the most egregious of our problems (American seminaries, Franciscans of Assisi, open homosexuals in priesthood, to mention a few of the biggies).
He also squarely dealt with the IMMORALITY of relative morality. He stood four-square behind tradtional Christian, Scriptural moral absolutes and moral imperatives. Not an easy thing to do today in the worship and courtship of cultural and religious diversity -- that is, accepting other absolutes/imperatives as equal and/or superior to our own.
He is also dealing with so many other issues. One biggie, in my mind, in the union of Orthodoxies with Rome. All but the Russians have joined. I think that was huge. The sticking point with many Russians was the Polishness of John Paul II.
Rome and Lutherans also signed a momentous agreement at the 500th anniverary of Luther's protests.
These weren't all officially Benedict, but I bet he was in on them in some form. They were all papal interdictions/interventions.
My two cents.
'star, are you sure of this?
There have been no unions or establishment of communion of any Orthodox Church with the Roman Catholic church.
Relations between the Church of Russia and the Roman Catholic church has been the worst (most prominently because of the problems left over from the Unia), so their poor relations with Rome get more attention. But the entire Orthodox Church is united on this issue of not being in communion with Rome.
Many of us Orthodox are cautiously optimistic about B16's prospects. He is more capable of speaking our language than JPII ever was. This may be because he is simply smarter than JPII, but I think that he is genuinely influenced by patristic thought in a way that JPII was not.
I like the guy, and hope he is capable of restoring Rome to patristic thought and praxis.
Took the words right out of my mouth, A!
"Second: Anglicanism is canonical Christianity."
Interesting use of the word "canonical"; not the way Orthodoxy or the Latin Church uses it.
Actually the nod should go to the Great Schism of 1158 (correct year???)
King Henry VIII was the final straw>
Relations between Thomas Beckett and the king of England at the time didnt help matters either.
Just last week our pastor was saying that Roman Catholics and all Orthodoxy (except Russian) DO have interchangeable holy communion -- both ways. THAT is considered "union" of a very important kind, I believe.
I would believe my pastor over you, sorry. He is a most educated man who stays abreast of these things.
I would NOT have brought it up unless I had heard it because I wouldn't have any real idea myself of the state of holy communion interchange.
'star, with all respect I am confused by the term "interchangeable holy communion." I am not sure what is meant by "interchangeable."
(May one infer, btw, from the term "pastor" that you are not Roman Catholic?)
Ah. I don't recall this but I might easily have missed it. That it was refused wouldn't surprise me, from what I have learned from the Orthodox on FR.
(May one infer, btw, from the term "pastor" that you are not Roman Catholic?)
No, you may not. I AM Roman Catholic and "pastor" is used all the time. The head priest in a parish is called the parish priest or the pastor. They have always been interchangeable where I've grown up.
He may even have the title "Rector" if he does the administrative part of the buildings too.
If your pastor really said this, he was very wrong.
"That means that Roman Catholics MAY receive holy communion at any Orthodox Mass (Syrian, Greek, etc.), except Russian Orthodox Mass and those members of any Orthodox Church, Russian included, MAY receive holy communion at any Roman Catholic Mass."
Your pastor is very, very wrong. If indeed he told you this, he should be reported to his bishop. Please do try to go to communion in an Orthodox Church. You will be turned away and it is embarrassing for everyone.
And what, pray tell dear Latin, would you know about the Mohammadens and living your Faith under them? Were your people massacred? Were your children hauled off? Did you Latins live under 500 years and more of pagan oppression? Orthodoxy did. And we are still here and we remember everything.
My error. I just asked this of my wife, who attended a Catholic convent school (in Europe) for six years, and she confirmed this usage.
Like I said above, I will believe my pastor over you both. Sorry.
He is more of an expert on what's going on from Rome than you are. He gets his information from the diocese, which gets its information from Rome.
Our pastor disseminates the information, not makes it up. He doesn't get those kinds of things wrong. That is his "business," so to speak, not yours.
He has a tremendous responsibility to get it right. You two don't.
No disrespect intended to either of you.
By the way, the ONLY way I would even THINK about holy communion at an Orthodox Mass would be if I were INVITED to a Mass by an Orthodox friend and I was given permission ahead of time by the priest.
Also, at Catholic Masses, there is no turning away of people from holy communion. No pastor that I know has ever or would ever stop the holy communion service, turn away someone from the bread of Christ and humiliate that person so. I've never seen it done. It seems way too against the very basic concept of Jesus' invitation to salvation.
But, perhaps your priests would do that. I dunno.
"He is more of an expert on what's going on from Rome than you are."
You know what, S, I'll just bet that in this area I know more about what is going on between Rome and Constantinople, from both sides, than your parish priest does. But I'll tell you what, suggest to your priest that you've been discussing this matter with some knowledgable Orthodox who say that Roman Catholics will not be admitted to communion in an Orthodox Church and that the Orthodox Church positively instructs its faithful not to receive in Roman Churches. Ask him to check it out with the diocese and see what he says.
A few years ago Rome put out an instruction regarding communion and the faithful of the Orthodox Churches, the Polish National Church and perhaps a couple of others. It said it was OK to give them communion but that it should only be done where there was consultation with the local Orthodox hierarch. Where those consultations have taken place, there is no inter-communion. Unfortunately, a number of those consultations only occured after several of the Orthodox hierarchs in this country complained to Rome. The position of the Latin Church is that there is no impediment to inter-communion but it urges Orthodox faithful to obey their own hierarchs. Our hierarchs say no, though the issue was reviewed in the early 90s when, surprisingly, it was the Russian Church which was for it by an exercise of economia and the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Alexandria and Antioch who were against it.
"No pastor that I know has ever or would ever stop the holy communion service, turn away someone from the bread of Christ and humiliate that person so. I've never seen it done. It seems way too against the very basic concept of Jesus' invitation to salvation.
But, perhaps your priests would do that. I dunno."
Our priests can and do turn people away, though not with any great show about it. Usually this is because someone is known to the priest to be living a lifestyle incompatible with the teachings of The Church for example, politicians who support abortion or people living together and having a sexual relationship outside of marriage or in some Churches, people whom they know haven't been to confession for some period of time. Priests will also often inquire of someone whom they don't know if they are Orthodox before they give them communion. The past couple of years, many priests have taken to making an anouncement before communion that the Eucharist is reserved to Orthodox Christians who are properly prepared by fasting and confession and are living their lives in accordance with Church teaching. This became necessary because we have seen a large number of Protestant inquirers coming to our Liturgies and innocently assuming, as is true in many Protestant churches apparently, that intercommunion is OK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.