The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
hydra, Kind, Augoustinos, Poliscifi, The Cub
5606 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (1 invisible), 288 guests, and 524 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Byzantine Nebraska
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,760
Posts412,082
Members5,607
Most Online2,716
Jun 7th, 2012
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Re: First Seven Councils [Re: Athanasius The L] #353737 09/29/10 03:14 PM
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 450
D
danman916 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 450
Originally Posted by Athanasius The L
Requiring unity of expression is one of the surest ways to guarantee schism.

It seems to me, however, that this is exactly what the Eastern Orthodox insist upon.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: danman916] #353742 09/29/10 03:36 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,283
Athanasius The L Offline
AthanasiusTheLesser
Member
Offline
AthanasiusTheLesser
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,283
No less so than plenty of "traditionalist" Roman Catholics.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: ajk] #353746 09/29/10 03:53 PM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
B
ByzBob Offline
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by ajk
But let me ask, when did it happen that the "Roman Church does not treat the councils following Nicea II to be truly ecumenical"? On what specific basis is such a claim being made?


It happened at the 1962 synod commonly referred to as Vatican II. Not in so many words mind you, but the results speak for themselves.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: ByzBob] #353756 09/29/10 05:24 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
Originally Posted by ByzBob
Originally Posted by ajk
But let me ask, when did it happen that the "Roman Church does not treat the councils following Nicea II to be truly ecumenical"? On what specific basis is such a claim being made?


It happened at the 1962 synod commonly referred to as Vatican II. Not in so many words mind you, but the results speak for themselves.
Here are words, like bookends, that bracket the "1962 synod commonly referred to as Vatican II" -- objective words where indeed "results speak for themselves." [below emphasis added]

On October 11, 1962, the first day of the Council, Pope John delivered this address in St. Peter's Basilica.

Quote
The Councils -- both the twenty ecumenical ones and the numberless others...It is but natural that in opening this Universal Council... Ecumenical Councils, whenever they are assembled... As regards the initiative for the great event which gathers us here, it will suffice to repeat as historical documentation our personal account of the first sudden bringing up in our heart and lips of the simple words, "Ecumenical Council." ... we wish to narrate before this great assembly our assessment of the happy circumstances under which the Ecumenical Council commences... The greatest concern of the Ecumenical Council is this: that he sacred deposit of Christian doctrine should be guarded and taught more efficaciously... That is, the Twenty-first Ecumenical Council, which will draw upon the effective and important wealth of juridical, liturgical, apostolic, and administrative experiences, wishes to transmit the doctrine, pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion, which throughout twenty centuries, notwithstanding difficulties and contrasts, has become the common patrimony of men... That being so, the Catholic Church, raising the torch of religious truth by means of this Ecumenical Council... Venerable brothers, such is the aim of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council...




POPE PAUL VI'S CLOSING SPEECH AND MESSAGES FOR VATICAN COUNCIL II DECEMBER 8, 1965

Quote
You will hear shortly, at the end of this holy Mass, a reading of some messages which, at the conclusion of its work, the ecumenical council is addressing ... And you will also hear the reading of our official decree in which we declare terminated and closed the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council...But note what is taking place here this morning. While we close the ecumenical council, ... At this solemn moment, we, the Fathers of the 21st ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, ...On this solemn day when she closes the deliberations of her 21st ecumenical council, the Church...


APOSTOLIC BRIEF "IN SPIRITU SANCTO' FOR THE CLOSING OF THE COUNCIL

DECEMBER 8, 1965 read at the closing ceremonies of Dec. 8 by Archbishop Pericle Felici, general secretary of the council.

Quote
The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, assembled in the Holy Spirit ... At last all which regards the holy ecumenical council has, with the help of God, been accomplished and all the constitutions, decrees, declarations and votes have been approved by the deliberation of the synod and promulgated by us. Therefore we decided to close for all intents and purposes, with our apostolic authority, this same ecumenical council called by our predecessor, Pope John XXIII, which opened October 11, 1962, and which was continued by us after his death.

Given in Rome at St. Peter's, under the [seal of the] ring of the fisherman, Dec. 8, on the feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the year 1965, the third year of our pontificate.


Re: First Seven Councils [Re: ajk] #353758 09/29/10 05:46 PM
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
B
ByzBob Offline
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
Now compare what Vatican II said about the nature of the church, etc., with what the other councils taught.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: ByzBob] #353760 09/29/10 06:10 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
Originally Posted by ByzBob
Now compare what Vatican II said about the nature of the church, etc., with what the other councils taught.
Does the Catholic Church, as evidenced by the statements of the Popes who called and closed VCII, consider that it was an ecumenical council and that, indeed, there have been 21 such ecumenical councils? The point I am refuting is:
Originally Posted by ByzBob
The point being that the Roman Church does not treat the councils following Nicea II to be truly ecumenical, so it is no surprise that the eastern churches in communion with Rome would follow suit. As Stuart pointed out, the ecclesiological assumptions of those councils has been altered, and so their value to the church has likewise been devalued.



Re: First Seven Councils [Re: ajk] #353761 09/29/10 06:29 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 689
J
jjp Offline
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 689
ajk, I think what they are trying to say to you is that, while continuing to label those councils as such, the church has shifted from treating them as ecumenical in practice.

Quoting speeches does nothing to demonstrate that what they are saying is incorrect. They of course would agree that the words you quote were spoken.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: jjp] #353776 09/29/10 09:37 PM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
Originally Posted by jjp
ajk, I think what they are trying to say to you is that, while continuing to label those councils as such, the church has shifted from treating them as ecumenical in practice.

Quoting speeches does nothing to demonstrate that what they are saying is incorrect. They of course would agree that the words you quote were spoken.
I think it does indeed "demonstrate that what they are saying is incorrect." Very much so and with actual documentation. "They of course would agree that the words you quote were spoken." I've heard that one before too, who am I to believe, them or my own ears?

I think the Catholic Church very much considers Vatican II an ecumenical council, and it has and continues to conduct itself on that basis. Please note that the "speeches" were not just any-old talks given at no special time by no person of particular note. The issue here is who is creating fiction and saying it is fact. So demonstrate don't just say "while continuing to label those councils as such, the church has shifted from treating them as ecumenical in practice." Which council has been so repudiated and by what means? Here is the original statement once again:
Originally Posted by ByzBob
The point being that the Roman Church does not treat the councils following Nicea II to be truly ecumenical...

That is quit a sweeping statement: "...does not treat the councils following Nicea II to be truly ecumenical."

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: byzanTN] #353780 09/29/10 11:16 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
From the moment in 1974 when Pope Paul VI spoke of the Second Council of Lyons as a "general council of the Western Church" rather than as an "Ecumenical Council", the game was up. Moreover, the tacit adoption by the Church of Rome of the criterion of reception, as opposed to extrinsic juridical criteria (called by the Pope, self-identified as ecumenical, ratified by the Pope, etc.) does indeed mean, whether you will or nil, that these councils are not on the same plane as the first seven, and really only bind the Latin Church.

It is important to recognize that the Catholic Church may not always be right, but it is never wrong. Thus, when the Church says A equals B at one time, and then says A does not equal B at some later time, there is no contradiction, no repudiation and no admission of error. Rather, through a series of highly detailed and increasingly opaque clarifications, the Church will demonstrate why it really meant A does not equal B all along. And if, at some point in time, it decides that A does equal B all along, another series of clarifications will show why the first clarification actually ratified the original position.

The Orthodox have no such problem. They operate on the principle of "Never explain, never apologize".

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: byzanTN] #353789 09/30/10 05:04 AM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 144
A
Alfonsus Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 144
I agree this is all over the same question again.
But then, do the Orthodox find it acceptable to say, that several Ecumenical councils be regarded as "General Council" and only applied to the Orthodox and Catholics?

Although perhaps the theological points inside those councils are acceptable to the Assyrian and Oriental communion, but still its ecumenical status is called to be non-binding, the expression is non-binding, the norms and disciplinary canons as non-binding to them. And don't forget, the dogmatic formulations perhaps as theologumenon at worst.

For me, talking about the status of 7 ecumenical councils is more interesting and should be basis for talking about status of further councils of the Catholic-church.
I think Rome is more willing to address those councils as not ecumenical or at least not in the same level as the 7 first councils. But the Orthodox seems unwilling at all cost to question the ecumenical status of councils where the Oriental and Assyrians were not participant.

Thus I'm interested to know the general trend in the Orthodox body, regarding ecumenical councils status when dialoging with the Oriental and Assyrian.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: StuartK] #353794 09/30/10 08:24 AM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Otsheylnik Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Originally Posted by StuartK

The Orthodox have no such problem. They operate on the principle of "Never explain, never apologize".


I think that follows from the principle that you can't explain sacred mysteries so you shouldn't bother trying. Having seen the mess the Latins have got themselves into trying to define the sacred mystery of the church, I doubt Orthodox will shift from this soon.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: StuartK] #353796 09/30/10 09:44 AM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 150
T
Thanos888 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by StuartK
From the moment in 1974 when Pope Paul VI spoke of the Second Council of Lyons as a "general council of the Western Church" rather than as an "Ecumenical Council", the game was up. Moreover, the tacit adoption by the Church of Rome of the criterion of reception, as opposed to extrinsic juridical criteria (called by the Pope, self-identified as ecumenical, ratified by the Pope, etc.) does indeed mean, whether you will or nil, that these councils are not on the same plane as the first seven, and really only bind the Latin Church.

It is important to recognize that the Catholic Church may not always be right, but it is never wrong. Thus, when the Church says A equals B at one time, and then says A does not equal B at some later time, there is no contradiction, no repudiation and no admission of error. Rather, through a series of highly detailed and increasingly opaque clarifications, the Church will demonstrate why it really meant A does not equal B all along. And if, at some point in time, it decides that A does equal B all along, another series of clarifications will show why the first clarification actually ratified the original position.

The Orthodox have no such problem. They operate on the principle of "Never explain, never apologize".


lol..

hahah

"Never explain, never apologise".

Is that how you view it?

The Holy Apostolic Orthodox Church is a Church of Sacraments. It administers the 7 Holy life-giving vivifying sacraments of the Church.

All of them are mysteries. All of them are works of the Holy Spirit whose action with us is life-giving, salvific and mystical.

Baptism - A person dies and rises wearing Christ.
His sins are forgiven. This is a mystery. How do you explain it?
What do you catholics say? "Well, the uncreated energies of God, when they reach a certain velocity, at given moment, the Holy Divine electrons of this uncreated energies will purify the person of sin and clothe them in a gown of righteousness.

We say: MYSTICALLY, you die and rise with Christ. We say as saint Paul says "that we may unit in the victory of His resurrection through baptism - rising in a new man"

Confirmation:

Its a mystery- we receive the Holy Spirit. How!??

Communion? You, my brothers, went off and started to explain this. You even gave it a term called Trans-substantiation. Great. Now you find yourselves blocked with no way out.

For us, it is a mystery. We eat the life-giving Holy Body of Christ. WOW. That's it. HOW? Its a mystery.

Its not that we don't mention the HOW to avoid never apologising.. PLEASE DONT THINK this way. We don't mention the "how" because the "How" IS a mystery.

Concerning the Church councils, I will post something later for you.


Re: First Seven Councils [Re: byzanTN] #353798 09/30/10 09:58 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
I have no problem with leaving the Holy Mysteries in the realm of mystery. I have a serious problem with refusing to explain one's actions or to apologize for obvious error or wrongdoing, neither of which is an Orthodox strong point.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: Otsheylnik] #353801 09/30/10 11:04 AM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
Having seen the mess the Latins have got themselves into trying to define the sacred mystery of the church, I doubt Orthodox will shift from this soon.
There is no such "mess" for what is the actual teaching of the Church. The "mess" is usually in the eye of the indiscriminate observer. As a result of a properly enunciated theology of the mysteries in the Catholic Church, those mysteries (for instance baptism) are applied in a consistent manner that properly reflects their intrinsic nature. Thus the Catholic Church is a true communion of churches that professes the mysteries in a tangible way, living the mysteries they so profess.

Re: First Seven Councils [Re: ajk] #353806 09/30/10 11:57 AM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
S
StuartK Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
No, the attempt to deconstruct and explain the mechanics of the sacraments has resulted in quite a mess, as Father Alexander Schmemann explained in his Introduction to Liturgical Theology and For the Life of the World. Theology is not a science, but for too long it was treated like one.

Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Alice, Father Deacon Ed, theophan 

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2019 (Forum 1998-2019). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3