www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Holy light of Jerusalem

Dear Arbannon:

Actually God only wants us to come to Him. Now if one way works for one people, and another way works for another people, I really don't think it matters to Him which 'way or road' someone takes.

If of course, the road one takes is faulty, and they can't reach Him, then it's a different story. But we are not talking of severe heresies here such as the Muslims or even worse the Mormons, who aren't even heretics but a different faith altogether. Nor are we talking about some Christian denominations that have adopted an everything is relative mentality where Christianity becomes whatever they want it to be.

Now this brings to mind a story I had heard on an Evangelical program about a Protestant minister that lived, (and suffered), in India for many decades. In all the years in India, he only managed to convert a little over a hundred people.

One day he had a dream, (or vision), where our Lord told him not to tell them to become Christians, but rather to follow 'Him'. A big difference because if one considers it, everyone has their own sense of cultural 'identity'. To tell someone to change that identity and worship in a way that is alien to them, it would be the same as telling them that we are superior.

Now you said:

"Nevertheless, what I believe, is that when confronting both orthodox and catholics, as two church institution claiming to be the true concurrent inheritors of the true church, God will support orthodoxy visibly."

And I say:

If you take into account what I said above about God's only concern is for us to 'attain' Him, then certainly He can only perceive someone that belongs to a church institution and making claims that his institution is above the other and the "true concurrent inheritors of the 'true' church;" as being a perfect example of our 'sinful' prideful nature.

In other words, we have not as yet attained the inner perfection that He wants us to strive for.

Zenovia

In my previous post I said: "In other words, we have not as yet attained the inner perfection that He wants us to strive for."

If we have not as yet attained the inner perfection that He wants us to strive for, how then can we make claims about our Church being the true inheritors of the true Church, since the only purpose of that Church would be to help us in achieving spiritual perfection and union with our Lord.

Our 'pride' contradicts what we are saying. But then again, we 'Orthodox' are not the only one's inheriting that nature. 'Pride' seems to be a sin carried by many within many Christian denomination.

Somehow or other, we all love ourselves and what we are. Maybe better we all try to love Jesus Christ and learn to follow Him.

Zenovia

Logos,

I think we all know that, on both sides (east and west), there are colourful positions towards the nature of Grace outside the Church. That is there is no black and white position.


Personally, I say we have to differentiate between God's miracle and and those which do not come from Him. Both are supranatural, but not both are God's miracles.


The whole complex issue, in our case, is simplified, since Holy Light is accepted by both of 'us' as a miracle, so that there is no need to discuss whether it is a miracle from God or not.


On the other hand, not both of 'us' have the same attitude toward Lourd etc.


An Apparition of 'our Lady' that speaks about supremacy of a Pope Emperor, or other Dogmas not accepted by the conscience of the entire Church, I view with suspicion, and thanks God that I dont have to give acount about it.


The Lady that has surely appeared to the most holy Saint, Seraphim of Sarov, and hundreds of others in orthodox churches, HASNT confirmed anything of what is believed in West.
On the contrary, Seraphim was another anti-latin, among other saints of orthodoxy.


Again, repeatedly, I say. Miracles do not represent Church's authencity in an exclusive definitive way, but, nevertheless, Miracles have been used from the entire history of God's people (Israel + Church) to show with whom was the favour of God. And I brought you examples even in Catholic cases. Francis of Asisi determined the truth between him and the moslem preacher in the court of Egypt's Sultan, by proposing that both, he and the moslem, throw themsleves into the fire for the love of God and the Truth they believed.


Saint Basil took over the Churches from the Arians, by seeking public miracles, to prove to whose side God's favour was. And hundred of other cases.


Dear Zenovia, I dont think the Church is perfect only when her all members are spiritually perfect.


You are surely mistaking different aspects of Church Perefectness.
For example, since you sympathize a lot with catholics. Do you think Francis of Asisi was operating in a fals Church (given that the Latin Church is the Church), when he clearly started his mission because of corruption that had captured the whole structure of the Latin Church?


thanks

Dear Arbannon you said:

"Personally, I say we have to differentiate between God's miracle and and those which do not come from Him. Both are supranatural, but not both are God's miracles."

I say:

The miracles that are from God will show by the fruits they produce in others of faith, love, charity, compassion, etc. If the miracles given to the Orthodox produce a greater love and compassion towards others, then surely they are from God. If those given to the Catholics and Evangelicals produce a greater love, charity and compassion towards others, then surely they are from God. We can only judge the tree from the fruits is bears.

You said:

"The whole complex issue, in our case, is simplified, since Holy Light is accepted by both of 'us' as a miracle, so that there is no need to discuss whether it is a miracle from God or not."

I say:

That is surely a sign of compassion, charity and love on the parts of the Catholics. It shows they are not elitists.

You said:

"On the other hand, not both of 'us' have the same attitude toward Lourd etc."

I say:

That is because too many Orthodox do not have the same love as the Catholics do. But then again, it is not all the Orthodox, as it is not all the Catholics. There are elitists and fundamentalists on both sides.

You said:

"An Apparition of 'our Lady' that speaks about supremacy of a Pope Emperor,"

I say:

You know, when we see the love and respect the Catholics have towards their Pope, we can only perceive him as being an emporor. It does not mean that he himself considers himself an emporor. Actually, he considers himself the servant of servants.

You said:

"...or other Dogmas not accepted by the conscience of the entire Church, I view with suspicion, and thanks God that I dont have to give acount about it."

I say:

I believe it was a Saint Katherine(?) of the miraculous medal, and the lovely and humble peasant Saint Bernadette, whose body remains intact and beautiful to this day, that will have to give account for it.

As for me, not being a judgemental person, but rather one that tries to understand 'God's' reasoning in what 'He' does, realizes that at the time, God wanted the Pope to establish the authority his position always had through a defined dogma, in order to fight elements within his Church that were tending towards heresy.

You said:

"The Lady that has surely appeared to the most holy Saint, Seraphim of Sarov, and hundreds of others in orthodox churches, HASNT confirmed anything of what is believed in West.
On the contrary, Seraphim was another anti-latin, among other saints of orthodoxy."

I say:

That is news to me! I don't believe any saint was 'anti' anything or they wouldn't be saints. The only concern Saints have is to have people turn towards God, not to go 'against' another 'Church' Frankly I don't understand how anyone could denigrate a saint such as Saint Seraphim by saying such a thing.

The only thing that I ever read about a great SAint, was that one wanted to build a church in Moscow where the services of the Orthodox, Catholic and Lutheran could be held, because he found sufficient Grace in each of them. I can't help but feel it must have been Saint John of Kronstadt, our greatest Orthodox theologian.

Father Arseny, who suffered in the Gulag for over thirty years, said had the priests followed Saint John's writings, the Soviet Union would have never come about. He said that it was the sins of the priest that caused the fall of Russia because it is the priests that the people follow.

You said:

"Again, repeatedly, I say. Miracles do not represent Church's authencity in an exclusive definitive way, but, nevertheless, Miracles have been used from the entire history of God's people (Israel + Church) to show with whom was the favour of God. for the love of God and the Truth they believed."

I say:

Yet at the same time, if miracles occur within other denominations, you say they are not of God.

You said:

"For example, since you sympathize a lot with catholics."

I say:

I do not sypathize with anyone, I simply cannot accept that God does not love everyone equally, and because He loves everyone, He accepts the different ways that people try to approach Him.

You said:

"Do you think Francis of Asisi was operating in a fals Church (given that the Latin Church is the Church), when he clearly started his mission because of corruption that had captured the whole structure of the Latin Church?"

I say:

I recall when computors first came out, that the lives of the Saints (Latin one's) were placed in it. It turned out that whenever the Church was on the verge of collapse, a Saint would appear and cause a reformation. Saint Francis was not the only one.

But let's not forget that we have had our ups and downs. We had the whole Middle and Near East taken over by the Mohammed heresy, and Russia and all of Eastern Europe taken over by athiesm.

So taking these things into account, let's not forget that our Lord said that we must not look at the splinter in another person's eye, but rather the log in our own.

Zenovia

I categorically disagree with you, Zenovia, and that simply because we belong to two different categories of Christianity.


1. Miracles are not proved to be of God based on Love they produce in people. That type of thought is purely a intellectualised (I mean that not in a positive way), outward form of understanding. Is a western individual's right type of love that you have in mind.
They surely function to bring people nearer to God, but that doesnt mean that their coming from God depends on people's reaction.


2. Is not a matter of compassion, because, if you would like to know, we have EXPERIENCED the compassion of Latins many times in history, you know?
From my perspective in here I am talking with Byzantine christians.


3. We dont bargain God'truth on behalf of a so called love.
Actually, from what you say, it results you are thinking about yourself being a saint, because, if one examines carefully, sainthood for you is unconditional love towards anyone, without reagrd to doctrines, and, since 'we'are not these ones, whereas you think you are (or at least you talk as if you were) that means you pretend to be from these saints.
And by talking about pride, such is when one considers him/herself a saint while in flesh.


4. A Pope Empereor, Zenovia, is doctrinal formulation on the part of papacy itself from 11 century onwards, and not simply a behaviour of people toward him.
I can show AT LEAST one occasion when a uniate bishop (if i remember exactely was from the assyrian church) went to Rome, pope forced him to lay on the ground by putting his feet (sole of the shoes) on his head, to show that he is the Vicar of Christ, whereas other bishops are servants of this Vicar.

It is from this attitude where Infallibility comes from.


5. Is a saint anti-anything?

It depends on how you understood this. A saint is surely an anti-sin, anti-error, anti-heretic, in thes sense that since, that what is wrong comes against him, he can be in no way in the same direction with it.


If you have read Saint Seraphim's life you will surelly find direct passages where he is a anti-latin. That will be the case with many other prominent saints coming down to our day - saint Justin Popovich in Serbia, father Cleopas from Rumenia, father Paisios in mount Athos etc. What about Saint Cosmas of Aitolos. If these are no saints for you that is another matter.


Zenovia. Do you know what is pride? Pride is when one leads a dobble spiritual and individual life, thinking that based on what one reads and hears one can make up how spiritual things should be.


Please, understand me.


I don hate catholics, as some of you may suppose. Neither do I want to proselytise anyone (at least, even if I wanted, and so being realistic, I am sure there are today no such humble people who would accept being proselytised, especially in forums, where people usually give more then they take)


I wish Union, but an orthodox one, not a Florence type og union. Today, east is threatened again from a modern type of Florence.


greetings

Dear Arbanon,

Actually, I agree strongly with your last statement!

We need a union between East and West that St Mark of Ephesus could accept - he did come to Florence as a unionist originally.

Alex

Arbannon you said:

"Personally, I say we have to differentiate between God's miracle and and those which do not come from Him. Both are supranatural, but not both are God's miracles."

No they are not. Only God is supernatural. Demons are preternatural and as such can produce no true miracles, but only illusions. A demon cannot heal a person. They may be produce alleviation of symptons that may appear to be a cure but the illness always returns. Only God can heal and make one whole.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Thanks Deacon Lance. I absolutely agree with you. When I applied the term supranatural for demonic 'miracles', which is a poor word, I had in mind, something which is above human capacity of understanding.


Dear Alex


would it be normal today, in a so to say modern Florence Concil of Union, for the legates of pope Bebedict XVI to ask Patriarch Bartholomeus to kiss pope's feet?

That was requested from Patriarch Joseph II, from pope Eugenios IV legates.


Nevertheless, I seriously wish Union, an, as you said, Marc of Ephesus type of Union.


greetings

If we can't get back to a discussion of the Holy Light, how about the Imperial Torte?

Incognitus

Does the "Imperial Torte" always exude chocolate cream on the Feast of the Nativity? I like torte, but it reminds of Dante's circles of Hell, with all the level of rich chocolate cake, and luscious butter rich cream. the more you eat, the deeper you fall into gluttony!

Michael

And discussing Imperial Tortes, are they made better in the East or the West?

We get some really fine ones from Swiss Colony, in Wisconsin, which is in the Easter part of the USA, although I have had some awesome tortes in Germany.

Arbanon,

Can you show this? I've heard that recently the claim has been disputed as being false, just a rumor.

Thanks, and God bless,
Jason

Dear Arbannon you said:

I categorically disagree with you, Zenovia, and that simply because we belong to two different categories of Christianity.


"1. Miracles are not proved to be of God based on Love they produce in people. That type of thought is purely a intellectualised (I mean that not in a positive way), outward form of understanding. Is a western individual's right type of love that you have in mind."

I say:

It is the extent of God's Grace that opens one's heart filling it with love. You know whatever I know I've learned from either Saint Nektarios, Saint Gregory Palamas, or Saint John of Kronstadt. All Orthodox.

You said:

"They surely function to bring people nearer to God, but that doesnt mean that their coming from God depends on people's reaction."

I say:

I never said that.


You said:

"2. Is not a matter of compassion, because, if you would like to know, we have EXPERIENCED the compassion of Latins many times in history, you know?"

I say:

I'm sure you have felt the wrath of many individual Latins, as the Latins have undoubtably felt the wrath of many individual Orthodox, Protestants and who knows who else. No one should dwell on those things.

You said:

"3. We dont bargain God'truth on behalf of a so called love."

I say:

But isn't 'truth' God's Spirit of love (Grace) which enters our hearts.

You said:

"Actually, from what you say, it results you are thinking about yourself being a saint, because, if one examines carefully, sainthood for you is unconditional love towards anyone, without reagrd to doctrines, and, since 'we'are not these ones, whereas you think you are (or at least you talk as if you were) that means you pretend to be from these saints."

I say:

No I'm not a saint, but didn't Jesus say that we must 'love' our enemies?

You said:

"And by talking about pride, such is when one considers him/herself a saint while in flesh."

I say:

No, I'm not a saint, but I think someone on this forum is. I also think that Pope John Paul II is a saint, and that Father Groechel is a saint. I also think that Mother Angelika is a saint and also an Orthodox monk at an Orthodox monastery I know. They come in all forms you know...they can even be Protestant.


You said:

"4. A Pope Empereor, Zenovia, is doctrinal formulation on the part of papacy itself from 11 century onwards, and not simply a behaviour of people toward him.
I can show AT LEAST one occasion when a uniate bishop (if i remember exactely was from the assyrian church) went to Rome, pope forced him to lay on the ground by putting his feet (sole of the shoes) on his head, to show that he is the Vicar of Christ, whereas other bishops are servants of this Vicar."

I say:

That sounds silly to me. Now if it happened, he must certainly have been eliminated from the Catholic Church records as being a real Pope. I once heard that the number of Popes keeps remaining the same because one or the other is taken off the records.

You said:

"It is from this attitude where Infallibility comes from."

I say:

Actually the Pope used the 'Infallibility doctrine' only twice...as far as I know. I'm not Catholic so I might be wrong.

You said:

5. Is a saint anti-anything?

It depends on how you understood this. A saint is surely an anti-sin, anti-error, anti-heretic, in thes sense that since, that what is wrong comes against him, he can be in no way in the same direction with it."

I say:

Actually I believe sin is a 'negation'. To be anti a 'negation' doesn't make sense. Love is 'positive' and fulfills that which was taken away by the negation of sin. But that is only the opinion I have...And believe me, my mind is limited.

You said:

"If you have read Saint Seraphim's life you will surelly find direct passages where he is a anti-latin. That will be the case with many other prominent saints coming down to our day - saint Justin Popovich in Serbia, father Cleopas from Rumenia, father Paisios in mount Athos etc. What about Saint Cosmas of Aitolos. If these are no saints for you that is another matter."

I say:

I realize that many saints lived in a very limited environment and the only contact they had with the outside world was through the 'viewpoint' of those that came to them, or the 'feelings' they had for their countrymen. If someone comes to me and says that you are a murderer, then that would be the only thing I know, and certainly I would say that murder is wrong. There have been many Latin saints that found faults with the Orthodox Church and mentality.

Many times though, we tend to insert our own prejudices, etc. into the writings or sayings of a saint. We have to question then if what we are reading is what the saint actually said, or is it the interpretation of the one editing and translating the saints works.

You said:

"Zenovia. Do you know what is pride? Pride is when one leads a dobble spiritual and individual life, thinking that based on what one reads and hears one can make up how spiritual things should be."

Please, understand me."

I say:

I understand you. You are saying Orthodox 'truths', which I agree with completely. I know you don't hate Catholics, because you cannot really hate others. You can't understand them though and are misinterpreting them and seeing them through your own 'cultural' eyes.

You said:

"I wish Union, but an orthodox one, not a Florence type og union. Today, east is threatened again from a modern type of Florence."

I say:

I can't understand why you are saying that. It makes no sense to me. All I know is that the Near and Middle East became Moslem after the council of Florence. Now it doesn't mean that I agree with what happened at the Council of Florence, because frankly I don't know, but I do know that if the people in Constantinople had been praying and had been truly devout, God would have found a way to save the city. Certainly He wouldn't have wanted all those millions of souls throughout the centuries, becoming Muslims and falling under the Turkish 'yoke'.

At the time when the Turks were outside of the city, there was a so called 'saint' in Constantinople that the people were running to, (can't remember his name), and he was telling them if they unite with the Catholics, the city will fall to the Turks. Well it did, so obviously he wasn't a saint, and obviously they lacked discernment.

After the city fell, the Orthodox were saying that it was because they tried to unite with the Catholics, and that's why it happened.

I also know that the people in Constantinople turned against the Catholic Cardinals after the Council of Florence, and they ran out. The people of the city refused to enter Aghia Sophia for six months because it was contaminated by a Latin Mass.

There was fighting among the Venecians and Genoese, and between the Italians and Greeks. It finally stopped on the day before the city was taken and they 'finally' entered Aghia Sophia. A little too late I think.

Someone said that before the city fell to the Turks, a mist was being lifted from Aghia Sophia towards heaven. Now I had always heard, (from the Evangelicals), that we in this country have a veil of protection and that is why we haven't suffered to the extent of those in other countries. (As yet!)

Well I think that mist that was going up to heaven from Aghia Sophia was the veil of protection leaving the city of Constantinople.

I also believe that if we are not uniting with the Catholics, it is because of our pride. I know that the Catholics pray for unity among us, why don't we? God would certainly lead the way, wouldn't he?

Zenovia

Zenovia


I certainly do not believe in a saintly byzantium, in a so to say holy nation of greeks or byzantines vs the evil western latins. No.


Neither do I believe that oppression and prejudicies are onesided, latin vs eastern.


Nevertheless, I believe that it was in West, not in East, where the doctrine was affected by attitudes contrary to what Christiany has aspired to.


Justin Popovich is a well educated theologian, Zenovia. So is Father Cleopas.


Ecce Jason


It might be well a rumour, I dont know, although is has been written in books as a matter of fact ti now.

Actually, its attitude is not contrary to what popes had adhered to throughout the second millenia apart of 20 century.


Its legitimacy might easely be derived from the idea that the enemies of Christ will be put underneath his feet, and the popes, by being Vicars of Christ, have appropriated the same atitude, in many aspects, in an outward worldy form.
That bishop, by being originally a rebellious inobidient Servant of pope, when submitted to him, had to put in the right place abd position, as to understand what was all about and whom he was dealing with.

That is very similar with the case of Florence when patriarch Joseph was requested to kees pope's feet.


greetings