www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Eastern Pope?

Theodosy,
You are completely and absolutely wrong regarding your statement about "not knowing any Catholic who believes that the Pope is the head of the entire church." Where on earth have you been hiding? Do you live in a cell? Can you provide us with a survey that confirms what you stated? Every Roman Catholic I have ever encountered says that the Pope is the head of the Church. That is what is taught in Roman Catholic schools. I think you were trying to be deceptive and evasive regarding the Pope as the head of the "entire" (catholic) church. You cannot be a Catholic if you do not accept Papal Infallibility because it has been declared as an article of faith by the papacy. Supremacy is but Arrogancy and fits in nowhere within Byzantine theology. You my fellow human being ceased being Orthodox when you church entered the Roman community. Your church never bothered to correct the heretical beliefs of the Latin Church but instead you go with the flow and like a Protestant, you declare yourself Orthodox. Not only Orthodox but Orthodox in communion with Rome! The fact is you are not. If you don't believe me ask any Orthodox Bishop. It's bad enough that the Latins have monopolized exclusively and hijacked St. Peter, the word 'catholic' and now the word 'Orthodox'. I don't know what's next. Perhaps our Orthodox Patriarchs are next?

Comehome,
You happen to be another cunning deceiver.
Vatican I had promoted a hersy which is not reconciliable with Holy Tradition but only with the Papacy. Papal Infallibility does not mean "that God Himself is Infallible" it means that the Pope is Infallible. We all know that God Almighty is Infallible. How on earth did a man(pope) become God? Why didn't the Orthodox Church come out a similiar doctrine called Patriarchal Infallibility? Christ is the only infallible being to my knowledge who unites and restores us within His Body, The Church. This makes the Church of Christ infallible as Christ is the Head and not its stewards(Popes or Patriarchs).

Moose,
I thought you knew better than to make a false statement about the Western-Rite Orthodox as "ROman Catholics in communion with Orthodox Antioch." Where did you get this lie? From Metropolitan Philip? Or from a free-thinking liberal demon? Or your very own geniune creativity? The liturgy of St. Gregory was used before the Schism and Orthodoxy has no problem with it but you yourself have the problem. Nor are the Uniates as you and many others are. There is nothing terrible with the word "uniate" because it basically states the reality of those who were Orthodox and left for the community of Rome.

Moose: It will do you no good to trivialize the issue of dogmas; we are not speaking of minor variations in liturgical practice or piety, but dogmas...dogmas that are central to the teaching of the Catholic Church. I noticed you didn't even mention papal infallibility. Is that just a matter of taste? Dogmatic teachings are always an issue of "black or white," because there are no options. BTW: If indulgences are not part of Eastern Catholic theology, why do your bishops defend them?

PAPAL INFALLIBILITY?? ONE DOWN??
..Pope Pius XII was the last pope to declare anything infallible, and that was only once -50 Years Ago - 1950 The Assumption, and only after years of study and research - and that feast had been celebrated by more than 1000 years.
..Vatican II -Affirmed that the infallible belief must already "reside in the body of the faithful". "Only when they have the full backing of the world's Catholic Bishops and the faithful, do the words carry the weight of infallibility".
..Cardinal Ratzinger -Vatican Doctrine Of Faith - "where there is neither consensus on the part of the universal church nor testimony in the sources, no binding decision is possible".
..John Paul II - one of the most prolific writers and speakers of our time, has written enough books to fill several library shelves, yet he has proclaimed that nothing he has said or written is infallible.
..Interesting Topic- but these days - there is nothing to discuss of it.
That we may be one!
Jim

For the Orthodox, papal infallibility is not a numbers game because we oppose the "dogma" on principle, not on its utility. Ironically, if the Churches of the East and West had been united during Vatican I, and if your consensus theory is correct, the "dogma" of papal infallibility would have been a dead issue since no patriarchs or bishops from the East would have approved it. Our profession of faith already makes us one, but the Romans refuse to accept that Apostolic Truth. The Romans demand more than God permits!

Micah,

I did not specifically mention dogmas because this thread is supposed to be about an Eastern bishop being elected to be pope. The fact is that one is primarily catechized by prayer and that the Western-Rite Orthodox are primarily catechized by the prayer and liturgical traditions of the Roman Tradition (I noticed that you conveniently ignored this in my last post). While the dogmatic issues you raise are important (which I clearly acknowledged in my last post) they are by no means all there is to being Catholic or Orthodox. Do you not believe that we are primarily catechized by prayer? And that if the Western-Rite Orthodox pray the liturgy of the Roman Church they are catechized into the Roman approach to theology and worship? If they are Catholics who follow the liturgical and theological traditions of the Church of Rome then they are Roman Catholics, despite the fact that they specifically reject some dogmas and doctrines of Rome, including those of the pope (who would properly be their patriarch in a reunited Church).

I also note that you routinely confuse the separate issues of papal infallibility and papal universal authority. Your rally against the pope falls flat since you don't have your facts correct. Anyone engaged in legitimate study of the role of the successor of Peter will clearly see that he was far more important in the early Church than most Orthodox today acknowledge but also used what is now considered 'ordinary jurisdiction' far less that the Roman Catholics are willing to admit. I like the teaching of St. Maximos the Confessor: "From the incarnate Word's descent to us all Christian Churches everywhere have held and hold the great Church that is here [at Rome] to be their only basis and foundation since, according to the Savior's promise, the gates of hell have never prevailed against her." (Opuscula theo. PG 91:137-140)

Regarding the use of indulgences you might find an individual Byzantine bishop or two who support and defend them but that does not make them a doctrine of the Byzantine Church. Gennadios Scholarios, a 15th century Orthodox theologian clearly accepted the Latin definition of both original sin and the Immaculate Conception in a form almost identical to that defined in 1854. Without too much effort one can find a handful of Orthodox who also accept this teaching or have formulated Orthodox theologies that are quite close to it. I don't use these individuals to determine what the Orthodox Church believes but rather I look to what the Orthodox Church has taught in Council.

Dear in Christ Robert,
May God bless you and be with you always!

Thank you for your words. This poor, wretched sinner is not even worthy to look upon the icons of Christ, and you rightly admonish him (me). It seems to me, however, that your hatred and contempt for us (Greek Catholics) is exactly one of the reasons why Orthodoxy lived out of communion with Rome is not the True Faith. You, like many of your Orthodox brethren, would rather hate your neighbor than love him. Are we not all commanded to love our neighbor as ourselves? Yet, it seems that many Orthodox (at least most that I know) feel that they are vastly superior to everyone else, and that everyone else does not need nor deserve the love and respect that Our Lord gave to all, even his enemies. I do not mean to judge you, dear Robert, so please do not take these statements as a judgement, for I leave judgement up to God, unlike most Orthodox. You tell me that I am a heretic, that all I believe is wrong, and so on, but that does not even begin to bother me. I know which is the True Church, and with the lack of love in much of the Orthodox Church, it is seriously sad to see how you call yourselves the True Faith. Christianity is built on love, not hate, and until you and those with you truly love everyone (even Jews, pagans, etc.) with the same love that Jesus Christ showed for everyone, you will not be the True Faith. Slander me if you will, but the gates of hell (and the hatred that comes only from that which abides in hell) will not prevail against the True Church. I wish you would take your hatred elsewhere, because you are not winning souls to Orthodoxy in this manner. This hypocracy that you seem to exhibit time after time saddens me, as I feel you are truly trying to be a good person, faithful to God. I think that maybe you should go to your spiritual father and ask him if judgement is not a sin. By hating others and slandering them, you deny the same God you say you accept. I know you do not want to accept our teachings, but you must get rid of your hatred, my friend, if you wish to be saved. For is not salvation not only by the right faith, but the right love and attitude which you are to exhibit to all of GOd's creation.

Humbly and with much tears, I remain,

in Christ the Risen Saviour,
Feodosij, rab' Bozhij.

May the Lord God have mercy on me and forgive me, a sinner!

Gospodi Isuse Christe, syne Bozhij, pomiluj mja, greshnago!

Yesterday was the very 1st time I have been in the Byzantine web site. I found the Forum and then went to the "Bitter Byzantine" catagory. In there, at 1st, I was learning alot about not only the Byzantine church and her beliefs but also the Orthodox church. That is until a Robert Sweiss started posting his "comments". It wasn't so much what he said as opposed to how he said them. The hatred in that guy against anybody who isn't Orthodox is unbelievable. I got out of there and this morning came into this depatment, hoping to learn more about ya'll beliefs. And now this Sweiss guy is in here. As I stated in the beginning, all I want to do is try to learn and understand more about my fellow Christians. Yes, I am Roman Catholic but if Robert Sweiss reads this and unloads on me then I won't have learned a thing other than hatred. Sad!

Dear John,
Yes, it is sad indeed. It seems to be the "unofficial policy" of the Orthodox to hate everyone else, rather than to show the Christ-like love and humility that is part of our common heritage as apostolic Christians. You cannot imagine how many times I have been discriminated against by the Orthodox, hated and called names, rather then shown love. I have shown love to all, even those who hate me, and have judged no one. It is sad to see these so-called Christians (for the word "Christian" means follower of Christ and His teachings) who hate everyone, even those that hold different views within their own church. It is because of this constant hatred, which I have received from almost every Orthodox I have met, that I have not become Orthodox. Well, that and my upholding of the Catholic faith.

God be with you!

In Christ,
Feodosij, rab' Bozhij.

There is theory and there is fact and the fact is I have met Byzantine Catholic priests(mostly older priests) and laity who are walking tomes of St. Thomas Aquinas,who is not exactly a son of the Eastern Church! Many of these older priests seem more Latin than the Latins. My personal experience with the Western-rite Orthodox clergy is that they are as Eastern in their theology as those of us who come from very ancient, priestly families and have been educated in the traditions and theology of the Eastern Church. This is my personal experience and the experience of those priests within my family who have frequent contact with the Western-rite brethren. In the case of the Western-rite Orthodox, the symmetry of theology and worship is skewed due to the fact that the dominant catechetical material outside of prayer and liturgy is Eastern. I have had a former Byzantine-Melkite priest tell me the same(Heavily Latinized catechetical material for Byzantines, other Latin influences,etc.) in reference to the Uniates.The papal brew of Latin theology and Byzantine worship or an unreasonable hybrid of Latin and Greek and other strange combinations which substituted for authentic Orthodox worship within the Unia for generations, produced a schizophrenic -delusional spirituality that all intelligent and knowledgeable persons would recognize as Byzantine on the outside and Latin on the inside.(The Elko-ite type of perverse charade.) You really see the nefarious results of this type of bastardization of ethno-spirituality in the lesser Uniate churches, which have been culturally pillaged and raped by Rome. In short, your little Latin-bag of theories has a copious hole in it, just like the brains of those lunatics who, in a drunken stupor, dreamed up the papal infallibility psychosis.I have no difficulty with the Pope of Rome exercising universal jurisdiction according to the practice of the Apostolic Church. You know what that means, so there is no need for me to elaborate.PS-Your Melkites and Russians are doing an excellent work in attempting to correct the errors of the past. I can be fair!

[This message has been edited by Micah (edited 05-23-2000).]

Yes John and Theodosy :Unfortunately - The name calling goes on and on: Micah above:
..Unreasonable Latin and Greek schizophrenic, delusional sprirituality, perverse charaders!
..Ethno spiritual bastards!
..Roman pillagers and rapists
..Drunken stupor lunatics

Maybe they just don't know the words are coming out this way?

Fortunately, I haven't met any of those stereo types mentioned above - and I doubt I ever will.

Jim

It is all right for Latin-rite Catholics, like you, to get down and dirty and refer to the Orthodox as KKK; drunkards(remember the not- so -subtle comments about the Orthodox Church and the vodka?);and also refer to the Orthodox Church as that "Eastern monster!" But if we get a little hyperbolic,describing historical fact and not fiction, well.....HUMPH!!!! BTW:When did you become an "expert" on the Eastern Church? You should have the humility to confess your ignorance and not pontificate on these matters. Not only are you a hypocrite, but you are arrogant as well.
PS-I would appreciate it if you would not misquote me. I never used the words "bastards" or "rapists" and you are well aware of that fact. You are very literal minded. BTW:The expressions I did use were taken from an article written by a Chaldean Catholic priest that appeared in a Greek-language publication. Don't blame me!
[This message has been edited by Micah (edited 05-23-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Micah (edited 05-23-2000).]

This Name calling just needs to stop! We sound like so many 5 year olds in the play ground. "They will know you by your love" i'm positive i have read that somewhere. I would suggest that if we are inclined to call someone a name, that we simply not post anymore. We Claim Christ As our Lord, lets act accordingly.

If you read on, I apologized for those spoken in haste remarks and mistakes and didn't repeat them. Your above stated historical facts more resemble historical novel than fact.Once again - you guys like to "dish it out", but if one small thing doesn't go your way - "you can't take it" - and stoop to name calling insults. It has gotten so bad, for a while I thought some of you were Byzantine Catholics in disguise. In a reverse sort of way, you have become some of the best Byzantine Catholic Evangelizers on this web site.

[This message has been edited by Jim McD-STL (edited 05-23-2000).]

Hay ya'll. Let's stop all this name calling and get back to the subject matter. Everybody needs to take a deep breath, hold it for 10 seconds, expel, and then talk "talking" to each other in a Christ like manner. Besides, I need to learn a lot more and how can I do that with all the nasties going around?

Peace be with you all.
John T