A high mountain. Somewhere in the highest of this mountain there is a spring.

etc...

We must return to the principles and humble ourselves. Yes, Roma has presbeia, it is needed humbleness. Returning to a theology beyond the past history and politics.

Forgive me, if I offended someone.

m+

Friendship is fine, in fact I am all for friendship, but I thought that you were interested in the restoration of communion between the Roman Church and the Orthodox Churches, and that you saw doctrine as a hindrance to that goal.

Friendship is a good thing, but my point remains unaddressed

It appears as if some of the posters are saying that doctrine is a hindrance to the restoration of communion between East and West,

Christian love is a doctrinal issue too; in other words, the divine energy of love is not some vague ethereal feeling, but is instead a real participation in the uncreated life and glory of the tri-hypostatic God.

Ultimately, the restoration of communion between the whole of the East and the Western Church can only be brought about by ecumenical dialogue that addresses the hard questions surrounding the doctrinal differences that have arisen over the course of the second millennium, because that type of honest dialogue alone allows for the construction of a foundation firmly planted upon the truth revealed in Christ Jesus; while ecumenical dialogue that involves theological indifferentism lacks the ability to create a valid foundation upon which to restore ecclesial unity between the Latin West and the Byzantine East, because it is not based upon objective truth. In fact, theological indifferentism risks merely causing new divisions within the two communities, separating Orthodox from Orthodox and Catholic from Catholic, and delaying the day when all of Christ’s disciples can be united in a real communion in the uncreated love of the Holy Trinity.

Finally, as an Eastern Catholic I want the Orthodox to stand firm in defense of the doctrines of Holy Orthodoxy, because – as I see it – the only hope for the successful de-latinization of my own Church (i.e., the Ruthenian Church) is for the Orthodox to force the Roman Church (both its hierarchy and laity) into a recognition of the fact that being Catholic does not mean that a man must be Latin, or that he must subscribe to Latin theological constructs and Scholastic metaphysics.

I know I'm the odd man out at this forum because I don't support an ecumenism of reuniting the Churches. (And please, everyone, don't quote me Jesus' prayer in John 17 --because I think that is more of a prayer for hope than a reality, except in the most mystical sense.)

-- John

My friend, de-Latinization of the Eastern Church means rejecting the claims of the papacy. Specifically, it means rejecting the papal claims to supreme authority and universal jurisdiction in the Church. Otherwise, one pope can order Eastern praxis, and another pope can order Western praxis; and both contradictory orders must be obeyed. But, if you want the fullness of Eastern praxis, you must believe in preserving that praxis -- above and beyond obeying a given bishop. In other words, if you want the fullness of Eastern praxis, you must believe that everyone in the Church is bound by that praxis -- including all the bishops too. Papacy or praxis: in the end, they are package deals.

But, that's just my $1.50 worth of opinion.

Peace.

-- John

But, I also say that doctrine can be a hindrance because different groups of Christians believe different things. Hence, we define ourselves, so often, as us versus them on the basis of religious philosophy.

I agree with you: Underemphasizing our doctrinal differences means, eventually, that nobody believes in anything except being "nice."

But, there are also folks who want to express the Mystery in primarily intellectual terms. OK; that's not a problem for me -- until it seems that everyone has to sign up for the program in exactly the same way.

Doctrines are good and necessary - but they are not the goal and the end nor can they be the reality they point to that we rest in them as if they were God.

... I do not accept the idea that the mystery can be separated from its expression, because these things (i.e., both the mystery and its traditional expression) form a single complexus.

I am absolutely opposed to reducing the doctrines of the faith to intellectual concepts. So, when I talk about knowledge of Christ – a knowledge that only comes through the doctrinal tradition of the Church – I am not talking about intellectual or discursive knowledge; instead, I am talking about experiential knowledge, i.e., participation in the very mystery of God revealed in Christ, which comes primarily to man through the Church's liturgical worship.

Now clearly it is important that the doctrines of the faith not be confused with the linguistic formulas or constructs that have been approved by the Holy Fathers in order to safeguard them from erroneous interpretations. For example: the doctrine of the incarnation is a kairotic event, an eruption of divinity into the created world, but the doctrine cannot be reduced to the words approved by the Church Fathers in order to protect it from heresy, because it transcends those words (cf. St. Hilary, On the Trinity, book II). Ultimately, doctrinal formulas are important in protecting the Church's experience of God (i.e., the immutable doctrine itself), while also preventing religious experience from falling into absolute subjectivism (e.g., by confusing theology with psychology), which is nothing more than a form of idolatrous self-worship.

Finally, as an Eastern Catholic I want the Orthodox to stand firm in defense of the doctrines of Holy Orthodoxy, because – as I see it – the only hope for the successful de-latinization of my own Church (i.e., the Ruthenian Church) is for the Orthodox to force the Roman Church (both its hierarchy and laity) into a recognition of the fact that being Catholic does not mean that a man must be Latin, or that he must subscribe to Latin theological constructs and Scholastic metaphysics.

Ray,
etc...

Apotheoun,
etc..

I think we need to distinguish here between doctrine as revealed truth and the expression of that truth--better still our understanding of the expression of that truth.

Now clearly it is important that the doctrines of the faith not be confused with the linguistic formulas or constructs that have been approved by the Holy Fathers in order to safeguard them from erroneous interpretations. For example: the doctrine of the incarnation is a kairotic event, an eruption of divinity into the created world, but the doctrine cannot be reduced to the words approved by the Church Fathers in order to protect it from heresy, because it transcends those words (cf. St. Hilary, On the Trinity, book II).

Ultimately, doctrinal formulas are important in protecting the Church's experience of God (i.e., the immutable doctrine itself), while also preventing religious experience from falling into absolute subjectivism (e.g., by confusing theology with psychology), which is nothing more than a form of idolatrous self-worship.