www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West What kind of Catholic?

"Only a heretic would claim that synergy is fiction and the Holy Spirit is a liar!"


Calm down, Rum! You didn't read my post. I stated that "Synergy is a fiction FOR THOSE ESPOUSING ..."


Synergy is, indeed, absolutely necessary for theosis to occur. :rolleyes:

[ 01-03-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Sorry Edwin.

Rum,

No problem.

Edwin posts:

"Synergy is a fiction for those espousing class-warfare mentality. Black-white; us-them; rich-poor; conservative-liberal; homos-heteros; presbyteros-laos; men-women; man-Holy Spirit.
"Synergy" or "harmony" among people is an impossiblity in such an ideology. It is a total disbelief that cooperation is a possibility in anything."


I totally agree with you Edwin. Let use categories like these, if we must, to study and learn about social structures as they were intended to be used. They are tools for understanding not cleavers to be used to divide the Body of Christ and label the pieces to our liking!

If we must use them, let us prayerfully use them as tools to look for the Spirit Driven Synergy that He uses to build up His Chruch.


Edwin Continues:
"The only thing missing in this ying-yang is orthodox-heterodox. "


The words of some here would have whole groups of persons who do not even exist as an entity in reality removed from communion with the rest of Christ's body. They would find heterodoxy in mental constructs where our Hierarchs and, save for a small number, the people of God do not. Such words, in my estimation do not serve the cause of building up the Body.

The Pope provides the example for the Catholic communion. He is tough enough to accept the decision of persons who have broken communion with the rest of the church through breaking communion with him and to deal with the individuals who threaten that communion in other ways. He is also tough enough to point out errors which threaten the purity of the Faith.

He uses gentle disciplined strength to seek to bind up the wounds of the Chruches and bring us together. He calls sinners to healing and the confused to understanding. He calls us to meet Christ as Christ presents Himself in the wholeness of His Church. He firmly leads us as a Pastor.


Edwin Continues:
"I would add one more group of Catholics to Petrus's list: the totally confused. This group is the one searching for an identity, a topic that came up on this forum numerous times."


I think that all of us Catholics in all of our churches share one Faith and celebrate one Eucharist, and participate in the Mysteries, along with the rest of the Liturgical actions. This is the place where all of our identity is rooted and held firm. We may be buffeted by the winds of change and dissent and we may become confused. In our Faith, in the celebration of Eucharist, in our participation in the Mysteries, and the rest of the Liturgical actions there is no question about who we are. This is the strength that leads to loving care for eachother and others in word and action that is a halmark of our Church.

This is that key understanding which those who would talk about the church in categories miss about the whole. The Church includes all of those who are described above in a wonderous vibrant unity. It does so while respecting diversity knowing that the whole is greater than its parts. It is an Icon of Divine Synergy in action.

This is the reason that attempts to separate the majority of us one from another by speaking of us as though we live as warring categories are doomed to failure. Unity without uniformity is a reality to us. God knows what God is doing in our unity and our diversity. We accept both.

We will follow the lead of the Universal Pastor. We will use gentle strength to bind wounds and build the Body of Christ.

Edwin Continues:
"The ying-yang here is Catholic-Orthodox. This hybridism is unique to the Eastern Catholicism."

The Spirit moves in all of His Churches as He wills. We are here to do His Will. Sometimes the places where He leads us do not make us comfortable; surely his Eastern Catholic Churches are His handiwork and reflect His Glory. God knows what God is doing.

I thought so to myself. Thank you.

We started out with the four models of the Church of Avery Cardinal Dulles, one of the great minds of the church. Proposed as four sides of the box of the Church, if you will, each incomplete in itself yet with virtues and points to ponder.

We then get a negative and hostile reaction to one of the four complimentary sides from one source. But wait! When all (save one) of the features are dispassionately considered, they are marks of contemporary Eastern Orthodox practice. Gazooks!

Ahh. Puzzlement. So most of the proposals of what Dulles calls liberal Catholicism are compatable with Eastern Orthodoxy. The mind wonders, so what is objectionable? Could it be it not the the proposals, it is the people? Ideas and actions don't matter, it is simply beating our enemies in the culture war?

I am not a Dulles defined liberal Catholic, nor any of the other three models. I think the Dulles liberal Catholic project has unwise pastoral results. But I appreciate this philospohical offering is a project of which many of its features can be considered (or employed, as with the Eastern Orthodox) and judged based on their pastoral utility.

Those who make these proposal are doing a service to the Catholic Church. Those who consider them on a pastoral basis but chose a different option are also serving the Church. Those outside the Catholic Church who wish to fan the flames of division (or create divisions), do not serve the Catholic Church.

[ 01-03-2002: Message edited by: Kurt ]

Well, at least Kurt has admitted his intention was to diss me.

So, if he is to be believed, Eastern Orthodoxy is Amchurch in Byzantine trappings! I've got to forward this page's URL to Синодъ, ROCOR HQ on 93rd Street in New York — they'd have a big belly laugh. I can CC to Englewood, NJ, too, to the Antiochian Archdiocese, chock full of converts Kurt would probably accuse of being capitalist pigs and/or Nazis (for not being "sensitive' enough to "the gay community', whatever that means). They'd be rolling on the floor too.

On another thread, Brendan has this guy pretty well sussed. He, Dan and I have had enough of his tiresome, often political "zingers'.

http://oldworldrus.com

Wow!

I feel like I just missed something. I'm not sure I understand the venom going back and forth. Anyway, I have some other questions.

I agree that trustee-ism seems to be almost a non-issue in Catholic circles. However, the relationship of the Bishop to the parish is not the only potential liberalization within the political structure of the church. Aren't our Roman Catholic Churches becoming more liberal by result of the priest crisis alone? After all, 10% of American parishes do not even have a priest. Many (most?) of these are actually being run by women pastoral associates. The sheer size of the other parishes essentially require extensive lay involvement. Often the sick and homebound are visited by someone other than a priest. There are lay ministers of several shades and varieties (hospital chaplains, Eucharistic ministers, and even lay ministers given permission to preach and preside over weddings and funerals due to extreme need.) Catholic schools often have lay administrators, and so on. Is this an unhealthy development or a return of the laity to their proper position? I would submit that in the Eastern churches, the clergy have very defined liturgical and sacramental roles but the laity have more naturally assisted in the social and fiscal responsibilities within the parish.

And two more questions: Whose responsibility are social outreach programs. e.g. homeless, widows, orphans, etc.? Does this differ between East and West?

John

Sorry, Fr Deacon John.

Let's get back on track.

Trusteeship vs. episcopal ownership seems a nonissue to me. Whether Vladyka has the deed to the church property or not has nothing to do with his apostolic ministry in his eparchy/diocese. (And even in Amchurch there is no "Lay Trusteeship Conference' having demonstrations/services outside cathedrals or putting up silly billboards.) It is not a matter of faith!

Basically I say anything to do with giving sacraments and serving in the altar — clergy (altar boys in all rites are stand-ins for minor clergy and in a way are clergy in training). Everything else is fair game for everybody.

When I first read your synopsis/quotations of Dulles I didn't assume he was including 3) in the bounds of real Catholicism. I am very sorry to hear from you he does. (How'd he get that red hat?)

5) Liberal Catholicism and Neo-conservatism (again in my opinion) can be found only as individual prerogatives.

<Warning: a segue into politics here...>

Why do you think Neo-conservatism can be found only as an individual prerogative? Do you, like the Society of St Pius X (not a diss, BTW), think all American ideas are antithetical to the faith? It seems a good middle way to me &#8212; between unthinking reaction and selling out to the errors in US society. An open but critical approach to the English Enlightenment that created the US &#8212; yes, "liberal' in the classical (true) sense of liberality. It seems a lot of its spokesmen are laymen &#8212; my impression is the RC bishops seem to naively buy the big-government, welfare Democratic Party agenda* except abortion, thinking they are being charitable. The free market works &#8212; by American standards I am living in poverty**, but I live like a pasha compared to the real poor in the rest of the world, complete with comforts like a computer at home. As a fine article in The Wanderer put it over 10 years ago, just like there is no such thing as "Catholic math' or "Catholic physics' that are different from regular math or physics, so there is no "Catholic economics' other than regular economics that just plain works and benefits everyone most in the long run.

</political segue>

As for the vocations shortage and the liberalization you think it is causing, perhaps it is by the liberals' design: manufacture a shortage by discouraging orthodox men from applying, then hounding out the orthodox ordinands who manage to get in (as some forum members can tell you firsthand). Whether this is at work or it simply is a byproduct of changes in the larger culture, the short-term answer is the same in all rites: more deacons and more men in minor orders. Take the most pious men in the churches, single and married, give them the minimum training they need, then ordain them deacons, subdeacons and readers (and in the Roman Church, acolytes). Such could give Communion even in our Churches owing to economy. One could even do what was done in Greece during hard times and ordain men, including married men, as Mass-priests who don't preach or hear Confessions, leaving that work to the priests who know how. They could be like Anglican "nonstipendiary ministers', priests not on the eparchial/diocesan payrolls but holding their secular jobs (like St Paul the tentmaker). Yep &#8212; worker-priests.

*Also part of the old Catholic workingman/Democrat connection, which the Reagan Democrats started to pull apart and the Democratic Party still tries to exploit, I'm sure.

**Last week there was a gang shooting-murder one block from where I live. I happened not to be home at the time. Of your charity pray.

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 01-03-2002: Message edited by: Serge ]

Serge,

I pray for your safety and wellbeing and that of your neighbors.

May we, as a people find a way to deal with the hatred expressed in gangs attacking gangs!

Fraternally,

Steve
JOY!

"Economics goes beyond purely technical issues to fundemental questions of values and human purpose. The Church believes that in facing these questions, the Christian religious and moral tradition can make an important
contribution."

--Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger,
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Reading these posts I think it is time this mother came in and spoke to the boys. It seems we have Dr. John, Steve, Kurt and sometimes Alex in one corner, Serge, Dan and sometimes Brendan in the other, with anastatious ususally in the middle (poor soul!).

I know maybe the fun of this is more shooting off one's mouth rather than ecumencial dialogue, but if people really believe in ecumenism, let me make a suggestion:

1) shut your trap on aspects of a church you do not belong to on points that are not essential. Kurt does not need to comment on trusteeship in Orthodox, and Serge does not need to criticize the Catholic bishops positions on social justice.

Kurt seems to defend the Pope and Catholic bishops. Fine, but you do so best when posting exact quotes from them. Try more of this and less of the other.

Serge has a nice apprecitation for the traditions of the church but seems to like factionism and to be unhappy with the world around him. Looking at the original post, I am reminded of a former pastor of mine who said we have to really believe in teh Holy Spirit. Being nasty to "liberals" or "feminists" does help. God will preserve the Church from errors (let Him do His job). Our job is to look for what is helpful and good in everything.

Brendan does a good job at expressing the views common to Orthodox Christians. He also has the brains (and kindness) to drop a matter when he is wrong (like the 'priestess' issue). As a Catholic, I don't always share his opinion, but he a good representative of his group.

Alex, I usually don't understand, but I like him. Can you try to be a little more focused, darling?

Mrs. Olga Nimchek

Dear Olga,

I am sorry for not being focused. I shouldn't even be posting here given my current life situation. Perhaps that is the problem and so I'll sign off!

Happy Christmas,

Alex

Dear Olga,

It has been a long time since someone included me among the boys. Thank you!

It is an honor to be mentioned in such illustrious company! Alex, Anastasios, Brendan, Dan, Dr. John, Kurt, Serge, searchers for truth all; sharers of wide knowledge and rich insight; my brothers in Faith. Thank you again for placing my name among theirs, undeserving of that honor though I am!

I see us a bit differently than you do I think. I see us as part of the circle of believers who are looking in wonder at God's gifts and sharing what we see there. We disagree and agree in differing configuations from time to time. I believe that we do so in love, though sometimes we seem to fail in that.

I believe that there is in the midst of our talking much ecumenical dialogue. We digress from that discussion, I know.

I agree that we would be richer for following your guides perhaps restated a bit.

I agree that posters should allow a church that they do not belong to be itself and determine its own practices without belittling them or it. I believe that most posters do try to cite original sources when they are needed. Most posters do have a healthy regard for traditions, Catholic or Orthodox.

I hope that you will come to appreciate Alex and his approach to guiding those of us who stray with gentle humor, insight and anecdote.

Thank you for sharing with us. I look forward to hearing from you more often.

Fraternally,

Steve
Joy!

Alex, I hope that you will fit us into your new schedule often.

Olga,

While your're in the mood to shape up the boys, open the door and take a peek at the behavior in the room (thread) called Ecumenism, Diversity, and Political Correctness. Can I watch?

Every greying hair on my head is smiling, BOY she said!

[ 01-04-2002: Message edited by: Inawe ]

Dear Steve,

But only if I ever get over my lack of focus problem that makes me unintelligible . . .

Am I really that bad? Sniff . . .

Have a happy Epiphany. "Yule" be glad, I'm sure . . .

Alex

Olga N. wrote: "shut your trap on aspects of a church you do not belong to on points that are not essential"

Mama Olga,

I agree with you, Mama. These brothers of mine need a good lashing now and then! LOL!

[ 01-04-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]