Replies

Being on the outside looking in, I was always under the impression that the papists looked at you guys as an inferious species...

The proper term is ontologically deficient. Yet, they can't show me where and in what is the Eastern Church ontologically deficient in its catholicity. In fact, Pope John Paul II referred to the Eastern Church as the "other lung," yet Roman Catholic armchair theologians on the FR insist Eastern Orthodox Christians are merely a "guest lung." Apparently they think one cannot be a "true lung" unless one is subservient to the Vatican "lung."

I honestly don't know why you guys keep mending that thread that connects your two so-called branches of the same religion

That is coming rapidly to a close. I will follow in Kolokotornis' footsteps to a considerable degree. But rather than leave FR as he did, I will no longer post anything on Roman Catholic threads nor have anything to do with Roman Catholic posters, a few notable exceptions notwithstanding, and then only via PM.

Eastern Orthodox posters have trickled down to a handful and growing fewer by the day. Seems like there is a disconnect between the Roman Catholic laity and their hierarchy in the Vatican in their approach to the East. You can't be "fraternal" and a "guest" in the same house. You can't be a "true" Church but not true enough. But they don't see a problem in these mutually exlcusive concepts.

Such confused reasoning of theirs says volumes about them. This is how it all started to begin with when back when.

In fact, Pope John Paul II referred to the Eastern Church as the "other lung," yet Roman Catholic armchair theologians on the FR insist Eastern Orthodox Christians are merely a "guest lung."

then the latter are wrong. If the Patriarch of the West refers to the Easterners as the "other lung", we have no right to disagree with him (actually we have no logical reason to disagree with him on that at all).