Posted on 12/09/2008 5:52:09 AM PST by TexConfederate1861
Normal Catholic? What is that? In Germany 6% of the Catholics attend Mass every Sunday. Is that normal?
The best thing for the American Church would be to get rid of the USCCB
And how do you propose that? And who will support it? After this Pope, the new pope will change things again. Last pope allowed the crucifix to disappear from the altar; this one brought it back. The next one, who knows...there is no more tradition in the Latin Church.
It is very difficult to evangelize in this society, and I think, at least here, the Catholic Church has done something similar to what happened in Russia with the Orthodox - some compromises were done that many now regret... Thoughts?
I grieve for the Catholic Church. Unlike the Church in Russia, which was raped, the Church in the West committed suicide in 1964.
Sure there was. The Golodomor in the Ukraine hit both Orthodox and Catholic clergy, property and laity, and the Catholics were viewed as foreign agents in addition to being class enemies.
Actually, I do. Man was created in the image of God so the children of God can be compared to dumb sheep?
The term 'sheep' is used in both the OT and the NT to refer to the People of God
Very "complimentary." This is like introducing your children to someone as "behold my little idiots."
I am not liking where you are heading with this conversation,
I don't like it either. It's just one of those things that are glaringly obvious, like a mole on someone's face, but never talked about.
My original comments were to point out that the East should get to know the Western theology better, rather than thinking about the wrongs they feel compelled to remember from 800 years ago (which has nothing to do with Catholicism...)
Lex ordandi, lex credendi, jo. You have to practice what you preach. You can't claim "tradition" and Patristics and do something that is not Patristic or traditional. I see the churches and the way people worship and then I hear their theology and it's a disconnect. It's like speaking with both sides of the mouth. Try straightalk.
If there is a true desire for reunification, it cannot happen while the typical laity in the East have your attitude that we are just "dumb sheep".
We laity in the West are largely indifferent towards the East. There is not an Orthodox Church 150 miles from where I live. In large cities, there may only be one or two Orthodox churches. Orthodoxy is largely unknown here.
I was in Lynchburg ,Virginia, last year and there were but two Catholic churches and one Orthodox. Some 200 Baptist, 94 Methodist, 63 Presbyterian and what not. Does that mean the Catholic Church "ceases" to exist to the point that one becomes "indifferent?"
Orthodoxy (including schismatic Nestorians) is the Second largest Church Communion in the world, and the only one that , besides yours, whose clergy and sacraments are valid, who share the same Apostolic authority through unbroken succession.
To say that you are indifferent to Orthodoxy says a lot. Just because your brother doesn't live in the vicinity is no reason for indifference.
It appears, however, that the Eastern laity universally hates Catholics, based on the same polemic tracts put out centuries ago.
Maybe if your side were not indifferent, as you admit, those events from 800 years ago would not have happened.
Reunification must come from both sides, Kosta
No doubt. One thing is certain: unlike the Latin Church at the time of Florence, we never asked you sign away your Catholicism. We simply believe that when, and if, the Catholic Church returns to her Latin Patristic roots, the reunion will occur from both sides by default.
Perhaps the lesson of the post-Vatican II experiment was meant for just that to happen. Otherwise, we will spend another millennium at "glaciers' speed" as you say, in polite co-existence. Apparently Pope Benedict XVI thinks otherwise, judging from his letters of not so long ago. Maybe he knows something we ordinary sheep don't.
Good point. All churches, and other places of worship, not just Orthodox ones, suffered in communist controlled areas. Are you going to tell me that only the Russian Church became an instrument of the government and that other churches were unaffected and not infiltrated by KGB operatives?
Ok....
In short- what is going on?
Are we reuniting or not?
I read what you have written people, but for me it looks like something from the “Lord of the rings”....
:(
PS I hate "Lord of the Rings."
They probably all were infiltrated, yes. However, that is not to say tha tthe Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church (and the Protestant communities) were treated equally badly — they were not. The Orthodox Church was seen as something the Communist authority could deal with, and it was useful to them insofar as it ignited patriotism. During WWI much of the Orthodox Church was allowed to resurge, because Stalin knew that without support of the Church he would lose the war. The official attitude toward the Catholics never had any mitigating factor like this. all non-Orthodox Christians were treated as agents of foreign powers.
What does that have to do with anything?
WWI -> WWII
The Council of Florence was not Canonical
It is not a valid Council. Any decrees from it are irelevant.
The main idea here is an abuse of Papal Authority
Anything more than primus inter pares caused problems, the Filioque being just one.
Exactly!
Wrong. NO ONE initially went along with the Latins when they first met at Ferrara. It was only after nearly a dozen sessions on the filioque did the East began to admit that the West continued to believe the same thing all along and the change was to combat a heresy, not to change a teaching. The statements made by the Latins and the Greeks to this effect can be found on the internet. ONE principle.
The "treason" had nothing to do with religion, but with coming back and trying to correct all the lies that were previously told about the Latins corrupting the Church via heresy. Remember, these SAME bishops were responsible for incorrectly interpreting the underlying beliefs of Catholics. It is natural that they were not happy to admit they had misjudged the West.
I can imagine the problems faced when these bishops came back and told them that the West still believed in the same thing, when the West had been previously villified by practically all clergy - and militarily, the Constantinople affair was still an affront in their minds.
No, Kosta. The lay REFUSED to listen to the theological facts - and so the Ecumenical Council of Florence (which both East and West signed to during the FIRST session, otherwise, they knew it would have no force) was rejected by the East because they refused to admit they had misjudged the West and were not about to give up their hatred.
Maybe after another 1000 years.
Regards
First of all, people HAVE been "waiting in line". I don't think you know what you are talking about. That is why the US has pushed to "reinstitute" the Latin Mass in many parishes.
Second of all, what does the Traditional Mass have anything to do with chicken wings on Friday? They are not related. Abstinence of meat is not related to Latin Mass.
Fasting? What does that have to do with Apostolic Traditions? It sounds like you are worshiping devotions themselves, rather than God, Kosta.
And finally, the comment on being "Protestant". As you may know, the effect of a sacrament is also dependent upon the recipient. The Church does not judge that, unless scandal may result. Perhaps in the East, they gossip over who goes to communion, but we try not to do that here. We give the benefit of the doubt to the person that he has prepared themselves.
Regarding Protestantism, I was thinking the same thing when you told me that the laity decided that the Bishops returning from Florence "overruled" the "traitors". I can't think of a more Protestant thing to say than that - every man is a pope and authoritative interpreter of the bible in the East? Who would have thunk it...
Of course, I don't believe that is how it happened, but according to your version of history, that is the conclusion one is led to believe.
Regards
According to the bishops present, which included the various Patriarchs of the East, they were. During the first session, the Greeks and Latins voted on this very aspect, since it would be pointless if the precedings were NOT ecumenical. The Greeks continued in good faith at the end by signing on with what was agreed upon.
Even if YOU say it wasn't, it should give you cause to analyze further what the West teaches, as the Eastern bishops DID under good faith. What they "betrayed" was they had to admit they were wrong and had misjudged the "heretical opinions" of Rome.
And finally, who had the authority back in Moscow or Constantinople to overturn all of the Greek bishops that were there? Or do we have a Protestant principle in place - that everyone is a pope, everyone is an authority on Scriptures? Who is in charge of there? Does everyone decide for themselves, or is it the side with the biggest army?
Regards
Ah, but you ARE asking us to "sign away our Catholicism". Unless we terminate all infallible doctrines that the Spirit has led the Church to declare over the last 1000 years are made null and void, there cannot be a reunion, according to the EAST. We must "return to our Patristic roots", which means, we must go back to 900 AD... Basically, it is extortion. For the East, either the West becomes East and changes everything to mimic the East, to include the type of bread we use at the Eucharist, or there cannot be a reunion. At least that is what I am hearing from the East laity here...
Sorry, I am frustrated in what I perceive as an implicit disdain for anything from the West, a continued invention of excuses to keep things the way they are. I don't see any Eastern effort to learn what the West teaches, they appear to prefer strawmen so they can continue to pound Catholicism and feel righteous about it.
Regards
Who was going to fight for Russia? Estonians? Poles? Ukrainians? Nazi Germany took 4 million prisoners in the first few week so its Operation Barbarossa invasion of the USSR. Many were non-Russians but many were Russians unwilling to fight for socialism. By opening the Churches, and changing the slogan to "Fight for Mother Russia" rather than the Communist International (COMINTERN), he managed to get the people of Russia to close ranks and face the enemy on a patriotic and not on an idoelogical basis.
Apostle Paul states that we are to respect any authority because all authority is from God. Christians respected the pagan authority of Rome and did not rebel against Rome even when Rome was persecuting them.
The seed for cooperation with authority is basic to Christian doctrine form the beginning and is base don apostolic teachings. The Church was state-run from the beginning, whether the state was extrinsic or intrinsic.
I hate “lord of the rings” too, that is why I made a comparisment :))))
“Unless we terminate all infallible doctrines that the Spirit has led the Church to declare over the last 1000 years are made null and void, there cannot be a reunion, according to the EAST.”
The “Spirit” eh? Well, how about this. You treat whatever “dogmas” your local synods and your “infallible Vicar of Christ on Earth” have come up with over the last 1000 years as local, disciplinary canons. We already do that except perhaps for the Palamite “dogmas” but we can do that and of course no Patriarch claims infallibility (which is good because we’d sack him in a heartbeat for being insane and/or a heretic)so we don’t need to deal with that. Then we have a Great Council. Whatever was dogma 1000 years ago stays, everything else is on the table. The council ends and the Laos tou Theou decide. Simple if you simply return to your Latin patristic roots. Our shared dogmas are fine. Your later innovations called dogmas are not. I assume Palamism isn’t for you. It is unlikely in the extreme that Palamism would be a deal breaker for Orthodoxy but it certainly seems that unless Orthodox accepts Romes sua sponte innovations, there’s no deal. You know, I can’t imagine why you would want to pretend to a common communion with people who don’t believe the same things you do. We certainly don;t want to do that. Under the circumstances, I’d say even talking to Rome is a massive waste of the time of all of us.
If you read the link I provided about St. Mark of Ephesus, then you will realize that the council stunk to high heaven, and that it consisted of nothing but Latins coercing the Greeks into total surrender. The Orthodox Church has NEVER considered it a valid council. READ IT and tell me that I am not justified in my opinion.
Reality is not pretty dear friend, and wishful thinking doesn't make things right. As for the "Lord of the Ring" comparison, I don't think there is any in this case.
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.