www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Cardinal says "True Church" is Roman!

"There is a difference between an affectionate nickname and an insult."

Can't we all get along and cut out the pejoratives? Was there a reason to use the term "clone.ugh?" This is really low and doesn't reflect sincere dialogue, but instead, reflects one's insecurity.

If it is true that the "other" board is a haven for disgruntled Byzantine Catholics seeking Orthodoxy, then let them be. They now have a home where they can swap notes about how p*ssed they are.

If it is a webpage that promotes understanding in the light of Chrsit and not ridicule or the like, then good for them. There is a lot of room on the Internet for many Eastern Christian websites.

Let's get back to the interesting article that started this thread ...

"Since this website and board are unofficial we do not have "official positions" and the disclaimer on the bottom of every page clearly states this."

This makes me think.

Admin,

I don't see how http://OrthodoxChristianity.com [orthodoxchristianity.net] is anything like this forum. I think you are mistaken.

Further, I find many of your post a bit uncharitable. Since I have no control over this unoffical Catholic website I will say many prayers for you. Prayers are always a good thing

If you think the Admins posts are uncharitable, you have not seen a lot of the posts on this or on the other forums. The Admin seems to be usually very balanced. As an Admin, he HAS to take charge at times! Some of the posts on both forums(including some of mine at times) have been hateful, judgemental, done for point-scoring, etc etc. Certainly not Orthodox or Catholic Christian.

But........... there are still a lot of people on the forums who save the reputation of the whole by their loving contributions.

Brian

Brian,

We will just have to agree to disagree my friend. I wish you well on your upcoming fast.

May many blessing come to you and your family!

and to you and yours!!!

Joe T,

I agree with some of your comments and that is why I have consistently wished the administrators of the clone board well. I don't think that Alex's use of "clone.ugh" is in any way low. It was in jest, just as my being called "The Death Star" on the clone board was also in jest.

--

Catholic Man,

Thank you for your comments and especially for your prayers! I am always very much in need of prayer. I am sorry that you consider my comments to be uncharitable but I think I have stated what needed to be said and stand by my comments.

Admin

Dear Friends,

I am utterly amazed that you all have wasted 3 pages on the subject of my website all in one day, with some of you even attempting to analyze my positions on things. Now that is flattering haha

On a more serious side, I notice that every time Nik (affiliated with my board as an Administrator) posts a post referencing our board, Alex chimes in with divisive attempts to stir up controversy. Alex insults my website as a clone, then puts smiley faces around it in an attempt to make it look "funny".

Nikolai is free to cross post in the first place, but I also don't see the point in doing that. Obviously people interpret it as attempting to get traffic hits on our board, so I'd suggest to Nikolai that he not cross-post things from our board.

As to the Administrator, I can see you find this whole thread to be silly, which I agree it is, yet I still find it interesting that you join in on the use of the word "clone" in reference to my site, when I consistently erased references to this site as the "death star" from my site. If we are really wishing each other well, might we not even give the impression that we are opposed? The word "clone" tends to have negative connotations. Perhaps we can agree that byzcath.org was an *inspiration* for OrthodoxChristianity.net, and thereby put things in a positive light?

And Alex, I never said one board was "for" Catholics and one "for" Orthodox. As the Administrator ACCURATELY pointed out, I see a different emphasis of the boards; he does not. When the Administrator and I met last month, we had a good time talking as friends and no one tried to assault the other!

As to the Administrator's assertion that more RCism is discussed on my board than on this forum, I doubt that, but do wish to point out that a certain poster active in the Traditional Latin Mass movement, and once active here, has brought his dissatisfaction with the RC Church to our board, with his newfound belief that Orthodoxy will cure what ails him. I make no judgement on his spiritual journey, but many posters remind him that many of his topics do not fit our board's objectives. I might point out that when I switched servers, I purposely did not put up a former forum dedicated to "Modernism" because it simply evoked much discussion about RCism. Frankly, I am not much concerned about complaining about the RC Church when I am an Easterner! ha ha

Anyway, I as always commend the Administrator of byzcath.org for his wonderful site, which of course everyone knows I participate in every day!

In Christ,

anastasios

Reverting to the original theme of this thread which has wandered waaaaaay afield of Cardinal Father Dulles' presentation (and I don't want it closed for being "off topic"), I think that there is an old Scholastic Theology aphorism that is applicable. The theorem is: "Quidquid recipitur secundum modum recipientis recipitur". (RUN to your dictionaries!!!) It says essentially: whatever is received by an individual is received according to the ability of the receiver. That is: any message delivered has to be formulated in a way that the receiver of the message/whatever is able to process.

Cardinal Dulles was speaking at Georgetown University, in an environment that is both Jesuit and Roman Catholic, and U.S.. His message, therefore, had to be formulated in such a way as to be understandable to Roman Catholics of the North American, nay: U.S. perspective. Since the RCs haven't the foggiest clue about us in the East, but only the foil of the Protestants of the West, his comments were relevant to that perspective. To suggest that his comments would have relevance to us "Eastern" folks, is to superimpose on his presentation an environment that is just not realistic.

THEY don't know we exist. Their theological perspective is Western (and only Western) in perspective. They deal with the Prots, and occasionally with the Jews, Mohammedans, Hindus,
Buddhists and others. Eastern Christians? Must be from Boston, New York or Philly.

We Byzantine (and Syrian, and Coptic, and Maronite, and Ethiopian, and etc.) Christians are not even on their radar. When dealing with the broad "world view" of religion in the West, they deal only with the RCs and the Prots. We Easterns are the 'comics pages' in the Western Christian world class newspaper. We're sort of like the mentally-ill relatives that they don't want to deal with in public. (Unless, of course, we are use-able as validation of the 'catholicity' of the ROMAN Catholic Church. Then, of course, we are up front and center-stage as witness to the universality of the Church.)

So, I can clearly understand the comments made by Cardinal Dulles. He spoke to Westerns, in a Western venue, from a Western perspective. Us Easterns weren't even in the recipe for salvation in this context.

I would love to hear what Cardinal Dulles would say about us if we were to handcuff him and tie him to a chair in OUR milieu. I think the text would be quite different.

Blessings!

(Arm the Ukies!!!)

Dr John has hit the nail squarely on the head. In other words, I agree with him completely.

I can only add a few half baked thoughts.

The fact that we are not on their radar, the fact that they are mentally unable to keep us on their horizon is, in one sense THEIR problem. I experience it as a kind of quasi-benign ecclesial racism on the part of a great many of my "Un-Separated Brethren".

Protestants are "real", Hindus are "real", but somehow Orthodox [even Not "inComm...." Orthodox] are not real. Ecumenism means Protestants [and now Hindus, etc. {many have a hard time distinguishing ecumenism and inter-faith (which betrays another whole set of problems, I think)}] but not Orthodox. We are for many a mere blip on the radar but no emotional signficance.

We "InCommunionWithRome" Orthodox have an even more difficult time being recognized and taken seriously for What We are, and not just an ethnic/quaint/eccentric subset of them. What had been ideological and theological hegemony in the days of the policy of Latin Rite paramountcy, is now a kind of cultural, psychological hegemony and exclusion.

Heck we can't even get all our own people to acknowledge that we are Orthodox or at least not an ethnic subset of the Latin Church, so how can we expect a cleric of our sister Church to clue in?

I attribute it to a sort of monolithic cultural psychology that has difficulty encompassing what they consider [or what is socially constructed as] "weird". They will admit to our existence intellectuall, theoretically, and when pointedly reminded [as in "Oh yeah, the Orthodox, of course..." with the subtext "Ok, now back to reality..."]. This is my experience anyways. And in so far that it is true, it's too bad....for them. They are the ones who are missing out.

I don't conjecture that His Grace Bishop Avery is trying to impose Older Rome on the OrthodoxInCommunionWithRome; when he thinks "Catholic", he thinks the Latin Church, full stop, point final, period. Ergo his equation of the Catholic Communion to "Roman." [Unless we give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that when he says ":the Catholic Church is Roman", he is saying no more than that the Latin Church is Roman, and the OrthodoxInCommunionWithRome Churches are Alexandrian, Antiochian, New Roman, etc.]

[I don't think he has revised his "Models of the Church" book to make the chapter on "Church as Communion" refer or even acknowledge the Catholic Communion of Autonomous Churches or the Communion of Miaphysite Churches. If reminded, he would, I am sure, graciously acknowledge us [probably as "rites" but he would probably be surprised that our theologians are calling us [and calling us to be] "OrthodoxInComm..."]

Even some of the most kindly, well-intentioned, politically correct Latins have trouble with this. I have a Latin acquaintance, who sang for years in a ROCOR choir [in Slavonic], who despite correction and despite being sent Der-Ghazarian's articles [Churches not Rites], consistently still thoughtless and artlessly refers to the "Eastern rite" [not even plural].

Of course there are exceptions: the shining examples of our Latin Sister-Church siblings who Post on this Forum, who support us by their words and prayers, who help us develop our consciousness as Orthodox, etc. etc. They not only know who we are and treat us with respect as siblings in real live legitimate sister Churches, they encourage us in our eccleisal spiritual journey toward Being [our own in God and God's in our own]. Would that all Latins have their "sentire". Indeed if they did, we would not need this thread. And I hope they know the gratitude and esteem we have for them. May God increase their numbers and preserve them among us for many years.

On the other hand there are perhaps aspects that this business reveals that are OUR problem.

Perhaps we should not always feel that we need "THEIR" ACKNOWLEGEMENT for us to feel validated [and perhaps many of you do not, but I think there is some truth to this, maybe].

As a minority culture/group/society [if you will], it is almost inevitable or at least pretty natural to see ourselves through the eyes of the majority, dominant culture [in our case the Latin Church] and to define [or distinguish] ourselves vis a vis the Latin Church.

I take is as another reminder and Call to become what we are, Churches - fully Orthodox and [where applicable] fully inCommunionwithRome. ...and to go about our business as Churches, preaching the Gospel, serving the poor, liberating captives, offering prayer and worship, etc. with all zeal and charity.

just a "couple" rogue thought [albeit liberally expanded upon]

herb.

ps:
There a wonderful scene from "Passage to India" [sorry "only saw the movie" {as my students would shamelessly throw in my face}]: 2 of the bright young intellectuals in the story, riding their bicycles, their barristers's gowns flapping in the breeze behind them...one says to the other in frustration: "why are we Indians always discussing the British!!!????"

while we love and respect them and are in Communion [or not as the case may be],
mutatis mutandis: "why are we always discussing the Latins?!"

Dear friends,

In Greece we have a proverb which says "I lanthanousa glossa leei tin alithia" (When the tongue makes a mistake then it says the truth). Obviously the tongue of the Cardinal made a mistake (he forgot Vatican rhetoric about "the two lungs" and " sister Churches") revealing what a lot of people in the Roman Catholic Church really think i. e. that the Roman Church in the one true Church and that the Eastern Catholics are nothing but Roman Catholics using “those strange and exotic Eastern rites”. The words of the Cardinal reveal that the Ecumenical movement is for many Roman Catholics only an intent to drive the separated brother “back” to the obedience to the Roman See. Cardinal's words drive us back to the theory of the praestantia ritus Latini and the theory that “its easier to you to be saved if you belong to the Latin rite” (that was a pope of Rome, I do not remember who of them, who pronounced these words). What about the Eastern Catholics? According to the ideology that is behind the words of the Cardinal (I do not know the Cardinal so that I would not like to judge him) if you can not put the whole Orthodox Church under the control of the Pope of Rome then you take some Orthodox them you put them under the control of the Roman See and you begin “latinizating” them (because according to the Cardinal “the Roman Catholic is the one true Church”). That is not the ecclesiology of the II Vatican Council, Cardinal Avery Dulles. That is not the teaching of the Catholic Church, you are wrong, Mr. “Dean of the Catholic theologians”. Probably you made just a mistake (I really hope so) or you are “a great pretender”.
Francisco

Dr. John,

Thank you for bringing this thread back on track.

You wrote, "... we are not on their radar"

But who was responsible for flying us off the screen? I think Fr. Cozzens has a few things to say about loyalty, responsibility, and tranquility that can apply to our insignificance here too.

A number of Latin dioceses have published policies regarding Eastern Catholics that are more supportive and understanding than many regions of our Church that refuse to de-Elkoize. Hats off to them!

Dear Anastasius,

I'm sorry you feel I'm attacking your Board.

I suppose one can only apologise in a situation like that because you won't accept any other explanation.

But my interpretation of it was brought on by my reading of your own understanding of its purpose.

(This is related to the original thread on Dulles' comments as he was speaking in a Jesuitical context).

Do you deny that you ever even gave the impression that byzcath.org was for Eastern Catholics and your board was for Orthodox, even in passing?

If so, do you wish to reconsider that and publicly say so? Simply denying you ever said it won't cut the mustard and it shows that you are not taking this seriously.

How your board is run and by whom and for whom is your business.

Alex
DeathStar Crewmember

Dear Cantor Joe,

I apologise to you for giving offense with my comment that I have withdrawn and promise not to use again.

It was inappropriate for this Board to say the least which is truly a board for Eastern Church issues.

As you said, we should return to discussing Dulles' comments on the papacy at the Jesuit college.

Alex

Dear Phil,

I have offended you and that is all I need to know to withdraw my inappropriate and offensive comments.

I see an evil streak in myself that is of concern to me and will stay off here to engage in some of that "Sacred Silence" that Joe Thur talked about on another thread.

I know not where to draw the line and I apologise and will shut up.

Alex

Anastasios,

Thank you for your post.

I think that Alex is being unfairly treated here. He was simply responding to Nik's provocation. Nik clearly takes advantage of every opportunity to advertise your site with each of his posts and has noted on this forum more than once that your site will soon offer much more than this site does. [I do not doubt this since there are four of you working on it and I have no help developing this site.] I have politely and humorously pointed to Nik that his ongoing advertisements for your site are not really the courteous thing to do but he has insisted on continuing. Since Nik works for you and affects the reputation of your site each time he posts here, I ask you to have a word with him about it.

I understand Alex's position here and am honored by his loyalty to the Forum. Alex is a staunch Byzantine-Ukrainian Catholic. He sees that in May you had publicly announced here on the Forum that I have failed to make it a home for Orthodox Christians since the discussions, in your opinion, are too Eastern Catholic centered and that you, currently a Byzantine Catholic, felt an obligation to provide the home for Orthodox that I have failed to provide. Then, when a new discussion board appears that is almost identical to this one and contains almost identical discussions to those here on the Forum, it should be understandable if someone should question the motives of those who have created it.

Regarding the use of the term "clone" to describe your board, only time will tell if it has moved beyond that stage. The Byzantine Forum has been over 4 years in the making and has earned what appears to be a favorable reputation among both Eastern and Western Christians, both Catholic and Orthodox. You will need to allow time for your board to develop and lose the reputation of being a clone.

Admin