Pope Francis calls for Unity with the Orthodox Churches.

Started by Xavier, December 02, 2018, 12:01:12 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Guapo

This is a huge plus of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apolstolic Church.  The ROC realize that they need the Unity found only in the RCC.
No not the Old Believers (who I am told are always ready to head to the Underground Church) nor the Ultra Orthodox but the more sensible ones in their Leadership.  I can think of no other example of this is the meeting in Cuba of Patriarch and the Supreme Pontiff. After 70 plus years of Communism and what some claim is the  acquiesce of the ROC to Communism they pretty much understand the importance of Rome. Here is another example....

http://www.pravmir.com/serbian-hierarch-for-300-years-there-was-one-church-and-now-everything-has-changed/

snip
¨We don't understand: for 300 years, there was one Church, and now everything has changed. This is a canonical violation which destroys Church traditions. Secondly, the granting of a Tomos of autocephaly cannot be done by a single Orthodox Church but only by consensus of all the Local Orthodox Churches. They were not consulted on this matter and most of them disagree with the decision of the Constantinople Patriarchate."

Miriam_M

Quote from: Michael Wilson on December 02, 2018, 09:37:03 AM
First before we get the Orthodox to convert, we have to get the Pope and the people at the Vatican to convert to Catholicism.

My man Michael.

Vetus Ordo

I've always wondered how exactly this sort of institutional unity can come about without one of the parties losing face.

Either Rome has to say: I'm sorry guys, we were wrong for 1000 years. No hard feelings.

Or the Orthodox have to say: I'm sorry guys, we were wrong for 1000 years. No hard feelings.

Either way, it's too embarrassing.

It's just not going to happen. Ever. At least on an institutional level. You can't sweep under the rug so many centuries of doctrinal divergence.
DISPOSE OUR DAYS IN THY PEACE, AND COMMAND US TO BE DELIVERED FROM ETERNAL DAMNATION, AND TO BE NUMBERED IN THE FLOCK OF THINE ELECT.

Philip G.

#18
Quote from: St.Justin on December 03, 2018, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 02, 2018, 08:26:59 PM
The catholic church also has its own matrimony problems.  The idea that we presume validity of marriages outside the church seems crazy to me.  Which, is probably a result of the marriage the church has tried to perform with the state in pursuit of empire ever since Charlemagne.  The orthodox are not the only ones with matrimony problems stemming from relations with the state.

Matrimony is the only Sacrament in which the couple are the administrators. The Priest only acts as a witness. so it is entirely possible for there to be  valid marriages outside of the Church.

I did not say that it is impossible, nor did I say it is crazy that it is possible.  What I said is that it seems crazy that the church presumes validity(as a general policy).  Maybe crazy is not the right word.  But, trust me, this is not hope - https://www.businessinsider.com/ivanka-trump-and-jared-kushners-secret-talent-is-matchmaking-2017-10

It takes Three to get married.
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12

Xavier

If marriages outside the Church were not valid, all non-Catholics would be living in fornication. Validity is presumed and someone who claims the marriage is null must point to some invalidating factor. Catholics are required to marry in the Church with Priest as witness; for non-Catholics like the Orthodox, that is dispensed.

And yeah, to the other thing, the Greek and Russian Churches have clearly erred on contraception (even sometimes in permitting abortifacients), which all Christian denominations condemned before about 1930. St. Chrysostom, just like St. Augustine, condemns the sin of Onan as contraception and a mortal sin for which God struck him with death. In Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae, the Church reiterated this.

Similarly, on divorce and remarriage, it's another aberration to say 3 marriages are permissible. Some of the conservative Cardinals wrote a study, "Remaining in the Truth of Christ" showing this is plainly opposed to Scripture and Tradition. Only the death of a spouse can dissolve a valid marriage, as St. Paul bears witness. Our Lord plainly says,

Mk 10:11 "And he saith to them: Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another committeth adultery against her."

The Russian Church also once taught the Immaculate Conception. They only began, tragically, to deny it later on, near the end of the 19th century. "Every Russian theological student knows that St Dmitri, metropolitan of Rostov (17th century), supported the Latin "theory of the epiklesis" (10); but young Russians are inclined to consider the case of Dmitri as a regrettable exception, an anomoly. If they knew the history of Russian theology a little better they would know that from the middle ages to the seventeenth century the Russian Church has, as a whole, accepted belief in the Immaculate Conception (11).

The Academy of Kiev, with Peter Moghila, Stephen Gavorsky and many others, taught the Immaculate Conception in terms of Latin theology. A confraternity of the Immaculate Conception was established at Polotsk in 1651. The Orthodox members of the confraternity promised to honour the Immaculate Conception of Mary all the days of their life. The Council of Moscow of 1666 approved Simeon Polotsky's book called The Rod of Direction, in which he said: "Mary was exempt from original sin from the moment of her conception". (12)

https://eirenikon.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/the-immaculate-conception-and-the-orthodox-church-3/

Quote from: VetusI've always wondered how exactly this sort of institutional unity can come about without one of the parties losing face.

One should "lose face" when one sins. Not when one repents. And not necessarily when the sin of those who lived a thousand years ago like Photius and Caerularius placed one in schism without one's own fault.

Fr. Fortescue, in the 1907 Catholic Encyclopedia, in "Eastern schism", states, "the old Faith is not incompatible with, but rather demands union with the chief see which their Fathers obeyed. In canon law they have nothing to change except such abuses as the sale of bishoprics and the Erastianism that their own better theologians deplore. Celibacy, azyme bread, and so on are Latin customs that no one thinks of forcing on them. They need not add the Filioque to the Creed; they will always keep their venerable rite untouched. Not a bishop need be moved, hardly a feast (except that of St. Photius on 6 Feb.) altered. All that is asked of them is to come back to where their Fathers stood, to treat Rome as Athanasius, Basil, Chrysostom treated her. It is not Latins, it is they who have left the Faith of their Fathers. There is no humiliation in retracing one's steps when one has wandered down a mistaken road because of long-forgotten personal quarrels. They too must see how disastrous to the common cause is the scandal of the division. They too must wish to put an end to so crying an evil. And if they really wish it the way need not be difficult. For, indeed, after nine centuries of schism we may realize on both sides that it is not only the greatest it is also the most superfluous evil in Christendom." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13535a.htm

The Consecration of Russia will end the schism and result in the return of the Orthodox to the Catholic Faith and their re-union with the Church.
Bible verses on walking blamelessly with God, after being forgiven from our former sins. Some verses here: https://dailyverses.net/blameless

"[2] He that walketh without blemish, and worketh justice:[3] He that speaketh truth in his heart, who hath not used deceit in his tongue: Nor hath done evil to his neighbour: nor taken up a reproach against his neighbours.(Psalm 14)

"[2] For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man."(James 3)

"[14] And do ye all things without murmurings and hesitations; [15] That you may be blameless, and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world." (Phil 2:14-15)

lauermar

Sure there are valid marriages outside the Catholic church but they're not sacramental. Protestants and atheists don't regard marriage as a sacrament. 
"I am not a pessimist. I am not an optimist. I am a realist." Father Malachi Martin (1921-1999)

aquinas138

Quote from: Xavier on December 04, 2018, 02:04:01 AMThe Russian Church also once taught the Immaculate Conception...

The Academy of Kiev is not coterminous with the Russian Orthodox Church, and the ROC is not coterminous with the Orthodox Church, and St. Dimitri is conspicuous among Orthodox in many of his positions regarding the Theotokos. That some Old Believers believe in the Immaculate Conception may be true, but it remains the insurmountable fact that the hymnody of the feast of the Conception of Saint Anne (December 9, the equivalent of the Western feast of the Immaculate Conception)—even among the Old Believers—contains no trace whatsoever of this belief; given the way that Orthodox hymnody is structured and purposed, it is impossible to believe that the IC would not be mentioned repeatedly in the hymnody for the feast, which rather focuses on the answered prayers of Ss. Anne and Joachim and the Virgin's future birthgiving of God. Also, the evidence of the Old Believers in anything cannot be taken uncritically—many among that extremely varied group have developed many curious and even heretical ideas.

The services of the Orthodox Church do call Mary "immaculate" quite often, but the word does not have exactly the same connotation, even if the denotation of "without stain" is shared. One difference is that the understanding of original sin is different. Many Orthodox use the term "ancestral sin" to avoid connotations associated with the Western term; many of these connotations are admittedly misunderstandings or exaggerations, but still. Whatever the Eastern teaching actually is (and it is much less defined than the Western), the situation of post-lapsarian Adam is much less grave than in Western thought. The primary punishment of Adam's sin is not a stain, but death itself; thus Mary, as an inheritor of Adam's nature, was subject to death, and the Eastern feast of the Dormition emphasizes the reality of Mary's physical death. It is no coincidence to my mind that as the consciousness of the IC has grown in the Roman Church in recent centuries, so has the traditionally unfounded idea that Mary did not die.

Ultimately, I believe that the major stumbling block over the IC is that the East has not dogmatized much of anything surrounding original sin, the conception of Mary, etc., whereas Rome has dogmatized many things, and in exclusively Latin terms, to boot. It seems that belief in the IC is not absolutely forbidden by Orthodox theology, but it is certainly a minority opinion, and it is not founded in the liturgy of the Orthodox Church, which would be the main objection to it being a dogma of Faith.

But Michael Wilson has it right—the Pope and his cronies need to actually be Catholic before they can convince anyone of anything.
What shall we call you, O full of grace? * Heaven? for you have shone forth the Sun of Righteousness. * Paradise? for you have brought forth the Flower of immortality. * Virgin? for you have remained incorrupt. * Pure Mother? for you have held in your holy embrace your Son, the God of all. * Entreat Him to save our souls.

TheReturnofLive

#22
Aquinas beat me to it, in much better terms than I can describe, although I have never heard of the Immaculate Conception as something viewed as a legitimate theologoumenon from the Priests I've talked to.

A theologoumenon (non-dogmatic theological opinion) that IS certainly in Orthodoxy is that the Virgin Mary herself was free of any personal sin whatsoever - in fact, there are some Monastic Saints in the Church who have thought they were sinning when they tried to conceptualize the idea that the Virgin Mary even sinned in thought - whether that means they endorsed such a doctrine or not, they still felt like they shouldn't have been thinking that way.

However, there are plenty of interesting theologoumenons in the Orthodox Church - there's a theologoumenon of Saint John the Baptist being personally sinless as well, and some more extreme ones exist as well - for example, Sergei Bulgakov, a famous and controversial Russian Orthodox theologian, taught that Saint John the Baptist was literally transformed into an angel after his death, as signified by the Eastern iconography of Saint John the Baptist (where he has wings)... an opinion a lot of people don't agree with (neither do I), but it's still an opinion none the less.



Yes, Russia went through a period of time where they were heavily influenced by the West, and Roman Catholicism's theology heavily influenced Russian theology and spirituality to an extent that there are still, to this day, certain viewpoints even today that are definitely from the West (for example, the Russian Church views the Sacrament of Confession similarly to the West in comparison to how the Greeks view it, and there is no permanent Diaconate in Russia as there is and was in Greece - unlike in Greek Orthodoxy where it serves a very unique ministry, in Russia it's merely an arbitrary stepping-stone to Priesthood)  -

But to say that, therefore, the entire Orthodox Church dogmatically believed in a specific Roman doctrine that was dogmatized in the 19th century, just because Russia went through a period with heavy Latin influence, is like saying that Rome abandoned the dogmatic truth of iconoclasm after the Holy Roman Empire forced a good portion of the Western Churches, for a period of time, to be iconoclastic - the effects of which can still be seen today in different ways.

Or to say that the Roman Catholic Church has abandoned Arianism, when there was such an extent of Arianism that even Pope Liberius signed a condemnation of Saint Athanasius of Alexandria (he of course later repented, but it shows you how extensive the influence of Arianism was in the Western Church).


Why are these aberrations - because these were not long-lasting traditions, they were trends which influenced the way a certain region thought due to popular heresies influencing the way they were thinking. Something similar happened with Russia, deal with it, it's in the past, and you won't find someone endorsing the Immaculate Conception in Russian Orthodoxy today, much like you won't find an Arian Catholic.
"The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but irrigate deserts." - C.S. Lewis

Gardener

Quote from: lauermar on December 04, 2018, 05:35:28 PM
Sure there are valid marriages outside the Catholic church but they're not sacramental. Protestants and atheists don't regard marriage as a sacrament.

That's not what the Church's theology is on Sacraments.

Sacramental marriages can be entered into by Protestants if they are baptized. It is, in fact, their baptism which allows this and necessitates that if it be valid, it be Sacramental. That they do or don't consider Marriage to be a Sacrament is irrelevant, since we are not concerned with their teaching writ large, but the Church's teaching.

Sacramental intentionality is to do what the Church does, and more specifically, to do what Christ intended.

Canon 1012 of the 1917 code elucidates this principle (#855, referencing canon 1012): http://www.archive.org/stream/newcanonlaw00woywuoft#page/204/mode/2up

Canon 1055 (1983 code) is the same: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P3V.HTM

"If anyone does not wish to have Mary Immaculate for his Mother, he will not have Christ for his Brother." - St. Maximilian Kolbe

King Wenceslas

Quote from: Michael Wilson on December 02, 2018, 09:37:03 AM
First before we get the Orthodox to convert, we have to get the Pope and the people at the Vatican to convert to Catholicism.

Exactly!

Any reunion at this point in time would be just two apostate churches uniting for the benefit of the world powers. I don't see the Russians ever joining until after the Fatima chastisement. Once PF1 is gone, PF2 will take over and complete the process of the complete apostasy of the body of Christ.

TheReturnofLive

#25
I think in all honesty it depends. The Russian Orthodox Church - Moscow Patriarch still has elements of indifferentism lingering around in the Moscow Patriarchate. I mean, there are really conservative priests and bishops throughout Russia, way more so than Rome, but Patriarch Kirill himself is more of a politician that plays to both ends like Pope Francis - so much so it's hard to determine what his actual views are except for what he's completely consistent in. He seems to be on friendly terms with Pope Francis, even - from a leaked conversation (I can't find the source, but remember clearly reading it)- discussing how to support the Catholics in these times of these abuse crises, because such distrust of the laity from their bishops is really problematic according to him.
He also has greatly shown an affection towards Patriarch Sergius, a very controversial figure who said that Communism and Orthodoxy can be compatible, and submitted the Church to the Soviet Union.

More than that, Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev, who is number 2 in the Russian Orthodox Church - Moscow Patriarch, recently visited the chapel of Fatima, calling it a "place of holiness" and said prayers there (!!!). Maybe he was just ignorant??!!

It's not that one sided though - Patriarch Kirill has in his sermons greatly extolled those who fought against religious indifferentism, saying that there is Only One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and none other in several of his sermons; he has greatly attacked Western Christianity for it's increasing support of moral relativism and has explicitly condemned homosexuality and abortion as abominations; more than that, he has a very, very deep reverence for St. Mark of Ephesus, as one of the greatest defenders of Holy Orthodoxy that prevented the Church from collapsing, and he has explicitly denied that the Church can change it's doctrines - period. He also seemed to kind of look the other way and act like "I dunno" on the question of whether the murder of Tsar Nicholas II was a "Jewish Blood Ritual."

Now, ROCOR (The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia), which split from Moscow until 2005 due to Communism, but entered back under the administration of the Moscow Patriarch (but still is extremely large, international, and very independent, spread throughout the world) is one of the most conservative Orthodox Churches out there. They explicitly anathematized Ecumenism as heresy in the 1980s, explicitly anathematized Patriarch Sergius for treachery. Even in the United States, in accordance with 12th century and before Christianity, there are no pews and women and men have to stand on opposite sides of the Church. You will also be chastised for wearing a short sleeve shirt if you are a man, and chastised for not covering your head if you are a woman in ROCOR, unlike some other more lenient Orthodox jurisdictions like Antioch or OCA.

In my opinion, if for whatever reason the Moscow Patriarch enters into communion with Rome in the upcoming decades for whatever reason (which I still see as extremely unlikely despite lingering elements of Ecumenism and indifferentism and Patriarch Kirill being a politician), by no means will ROCOR even consider it and will excommunicate Moscow for this - as will many of the other extremely conservative Eastern Orthodox Churches like Georgia, Serbia, Romania, etc.
"The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but irrigate deserts." - C.S. Lewis

Josephine87

#26
St. Peter Chrysologus also confirmed the Immaculate Conception back in the 400s. I just read it in Gueranger's Liturgical Year.
"Begin again." -St. Teresa of Avila

"My present trial seems to me a somewhat painful one, and I have the humiliation of knowing how badly I bore it at first. I now want to accept and to carry this little cross joyfully, to carry it silently, with a smile in my heart and on my lips, in union with the Cross of Christ. My God, blessed be Thou; accept from me each day the embarrassment, inconvenience, and pain this misery causes me. May it become a prayer and an act of reparation." -Elisabeth Leseur

Prayerful

Quote from: St.Justin on December 03, 2018, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Philip G. on December 02, 2018, 08:26:59 PM
The catholic church also has its own matrimony problems.  The idea that we presume validity of marriages outside the church seems crazy to me.  Which, is probably a result of the marriage the church has tried to perform with the state in pursuit of empire ever since Charlemagne.  The orthodox are not the only ones with matrimony problems stemming from relations with the state.

Matrimony is the only Sacrament in which the couple are the administrators. The Priest only acts as a witness. so it is entirely possible for there to be  valid marriages outside of the Church.

Yes, we should all remember that Japanese Catholics baptised and married for centuries without priests. Marriages are presumed valid unless proven otherwise, to clear degree of moral certainty.
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.

Josephine87

Pope St. Liberius is considered a saint by the Orthodox and was considered a saint in the Western church for some time.

It is believed he signed the denunciation of Athanasius under extreme duress.

https://oca.org/saints/lives/2012/08/27/102408-st-liberius-the-pope-of-rome

http://theradtrad.blogspot.com/2014/03/st-liberius-pope-of-rome.html?m=1
"Begin again." -St. Teresa of Avila

"My present trial seems to me a somewhat painful one, and I have the humiliation of knowing how badly I bore it at first. I now want to accept and to carry this little cross joyfully, to carry it silently, with a smile in my heart and on my lips, in union with the Cross of Christ. My God, blessed be Thou; accept from me each day the embarrassment, inconvenience, and pain this misery causes me. May it become a prayer and an act of reparation." -Elisabeth Leseur

Guapo

Patriarch Kirill doubts Patriarch Bartholonew's "sound mind"

Moscow, December 27, Interfax - Constantinople's decision to cancel the 300-year-old decree on transferring the Kiev Metropolitanate to Moscow could not be adapted in sane mind.
"Constantinople's actions are perplexing from the point of common sense. I wonder how they could say that they abolish Patriarch Dionysius' charter of 1686! I wonder how anyone of church or secular leaders being in sound mind can say that a historical act of 300-year-old is abolished," Patriarch Kirill said in Moscow resuming the results of the Supreme Church Council.
He recalled Aristotle's words that the only thing God is unable to do is to make being not being.
"Act of 1686 is the reality which was the beginning of a long story. Can we imagine that the Great Britain abolishes the act of India independence?" Patriarch Kirill wonders.
According to him, it would equally strange to abolish the act of independence of the United States. "Will it change anything? Everyone will laugh at it," the patriarch said stressing that "abolishment" of the 300-year-old document is "a caricature story", which Constantinople decided to perform and "it looks as tragedy and comedy together."