www.byzcath.org

Dear Friends,

The idea has been put forward as to what the common faith of a united Catholic-Orthodox Church will look like - an interesting proposition.

I think it will remain the same for both Churches with the Latin West continuing to believe as it has always believed, but recasting its positions as part of its Latin theological tradition - which is not denied by the East.

The issue of authority is one that will force both Churches to re-think a few things.

The offensiveness of the Fatimist groups, such as Fr. Gruner's, in all this is that they deny that such rapprochement needs to occur for true unity to take place.

All that is necessary, so they say, is for Orthodoxy to "return" to the Catholic Church from whence it separated in 1054 AD.

And they ascribe this perspective to the Mother of God herself at Fatima!

To deny their perspective is to be immediately labelled as having been deceived by Satan himself.

And if the Vatican opposes them, then the Vatican is open to criticism as well.

To consecrate Russia in this vein is to make a public statement, then, that Russia's Orthodox Christians need to "come over" to Rome, the graceless schismatics that they are . . .

Rome is right to, in so many actions, denounce such a "consecration" in the name of the Mother of God - the Mother of God, it should be known to Fr. Gruner and his supporters is much more highly honoured in the Orthodox Church than anywhere else.

Even traditional RCism pales in its devotion to the Mother of God by comparison to the great liturgical feasts, holy icons and prayers that enshrine the Most Holy Virgin Mary in the East.

The West can teach us (Orthodox and EC's) NOTHING about devotion to the Mother of God.

Alex

Alex,

What I've always found interesting in Roman Catholicism is that the people's devotion to and love for the Mother of God most often exceeds the official hyperdulia to her found within the liturgical life of the Roman Catholic Church. I think that the RCC does a poor job in reflecting her people's devotion to the Virgin, whereas the Eastern Churches more fully and accurately reflect the people's devotion. But I don't know if I'm convinced that Orthodox and ECs as individuals have more love for the Theotokos than individual RCs. But, hands down, Eastern Christianity beats out its Western counterpart in official devotion to Our Lady.

Logos Teen

Hear hear Alex - this Catholic is in complete agreement with you on this last point.

I didn't dare say "this Latin" as I was told rather firmly recently that I was in fact more EC than many cradle ECs

Anhelyna

[QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Orthodox Catholic:
[qb] Dear Friends,..........

The West can teach us (Orthodox and EC's) NOTHING about devotion to the Mother of God.

Alex, while I certainly agree with you about Fr Gruner [indeed it is troubling that we even have to make the case that this obviously errant priest is errant], that is a bold statement from someone whom I know to be a disciple of St Louis de Montfort and a devotee of the Rosary. There is no need to overreact because of an obviously unbalanced Latin like Fr Gruner. East and West can learn a lot from one another in this as in all things...
-Daniel

Let's see if this time my post goes to the correct forum. Here goes:
First of all I'de like to say that I am upset that the reply that I posted yesterday is no longer up. It seems the devil is working awfully hard to disrupt the work of Gods and Our Ladies Servant.
Second, I'd like to say that "Heavens Key to Peace" was awesome. According to a few Catholic scholars in the movie, world peace can be achieved through the TRUE consecration of Russia. Some of these same scholars claim Sr. Lucia has said that the 1984 Consecration did not sufice our Ladies wishes, therefore I believe Fa. Gruner's continous battle to get Russia consecrated is valid. The Vatican Beauracracy is probably the one not allowing Our Ladies wishes to take effect. Even his Holyness, Pope John Paul II agrees that what was consecrated was the world, which included Russia, but the consecration was not specifically directed at Russia. This is what our Lady and Sr. Lucia want. Peace to all.

:rolleyes: Gospodi Pomilui!

The case with Fr. Gruner is fairly clear cut from a canonical point of view and doesn't really appear all that murky.

The Apostolic Signatura upheld Father Nicholas Gruner�s suspension from his priestly faculties. The Signatura is the Church�s highest court of appeal, short of the Holy Father himself.

News of this suspension was made public in an official press release which stated "The Congregation for the Clergy, upon the mandate from a higher authority, wishes to state that Rev. Nicholas Gruner is under a divinis suspension, which has been confirmed by a definitive sentence of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura." At least in the case of Fr. Gruner, Rome has indeed spoken. He is suspended.

For years Fr. Gruner has claimed to have been validly ordained in the Diocese of Avellino. When the legitimate bishop of Avellino requested Fr. Gruner to return to his home diocese, he was refused. Please tell me what is unreasonable about asking a priest of your diocese on the lam to get his bum back there to serve it?

He had plenty of time to ask for incardination to another diocese all of those years. It is no one but Fr. Gruner's fault he is in this situation. This is a clear case of disobedience to your Bishop and shepherd. It would be one thing if that bishop asked you to perform an act that was against the Church. All he asked was for him to return.

If anyone wants to read more: http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/fatima/ngruner/ngruner.PDF
The noted lay canonist Peter Vere's opinion: http://home.earthlink.net/~grossklas/canon_law_and_gruner_suspension.htm
The EWTN article on this matter: http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/fr_gruner.htm
But to simply refuse to return to your home diocese for her service, that is a problem and a public sign of disobedience.

The Bishop of Fatima in 1992 made a public statement that Fr. Gruner did not have faculties in his diocese which was published in the 4 October 1992 of L'Osservatore Romano.

Fr. Gruner nonetheless presumed to have his "Peace in the World and the Immaculate Heart of Mary" in Fatima on October 8-12 of that year, at which he not only said Mass but also heard confessions, which specifically requires faculties from the local bishop, which he had been specifically refused and refused publically.

And, as a final piece of documentation, a photocopy of a letter from the Nuncio to Fr. Robert Fox is on-line at http://www.fatimafamily.org/news/gruner.html The Nuncio clearly states "not a priest in good standing".

The real question is: when Our Lady asked for Russia to be consecrated, did she mean czarist Russia? Is Ukraine included? (If so, what do the Ukrainians think?) Maybe she meant all Rus-Ukraine? Or maybe *all* the lands of Rus? What if she really meant Ruthenia? I'm sure plenty of Rusyns and Western Ukrainians are already consecrated to her immaculate heart, so it wouldn't take much!

What exactly does it mean to consecrate a country to something? What if the people in the country don't want it?

I caught the last half hour of this program in question. I found several things disturbing. The main argument was that "you've got nothing to lose and world peace to gain, so just let us do it and see." This seemed silly. Plus, if world peace doesn't ensure, will that mean the consecration was ineffective, or that the wrong people performed it? The fact that I didn't hear much, if anything, about Jesus or the Gospel did not make me appreciate the program. If, as St. Paul says, "[Christ] is our peace," then I would definately have expected some talk of Him regarding world peace! Christ also warned of those who say "peace, peace" when there is no peace....

If the argument is that we "have nothing to lose" by trying this, I say we get Pope Pius XIII [truecatholic.org] to consecrate Russia. He'll probably do it without any problem.

Dave, schismatic Orthodox who really has nothing against Our Lady or the Catholic Church

And to add a bit more insult to injury, the "Eastern Rite Bishop" mentioned several times by Fr. Gruner and his "Apostolate" as being supportive of him is none other than Roman Danylak. Birds of a feather...

Dave, if not Pope Pius XIII than perhaps Pope Michael here in Kansas? http://popemichael.homestead.com/

Personally I don't think it would be possible to agree on a common faith. I think what (a LONG time in the future)will happen, God willing, will be recognition by east and west that the other shares the essentials of the Apostolic faith (if not entirely to each others satisfaction!) and this would allow communion to be re-established. I can't remeber who said this but 'Western and Eastern Christianity are complimentary expressions of the same faith.'

I would go along with that.

JGC

Jloer,

By my count, this post now appears 5 times in this thread, four times on page 2 (1 of which is your initial post, the absence of which you complain in the other 3 ) and once more here on page 3. Trust me, we've read what you had to say :rolleyes: .

Many years,

Neil

Yeah, I was a little confused about the posts too; there are five of them now.

Logos Teen