The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Bodhi Zaffa, anaxios2022, Lillian, ROCOR man, comehavebreakfast
5,878 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 155 guests, and 16 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Byzantine Nebraska
Byzantine Nebraska
by orthodoxsinner2, December 11
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,217
Posts415,273
Members5,878
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
Quote
Rome says Greek Catholics (most of whom are Slavs, Galician Ukrainians) are externally to be exactly like the OicwRs, Orthodox, but must accept all post-schism Roman definitions of doctrine including what seems to be the one insurmountable difference between the two churches, the scope of the Pope (divinely instituted channel of the church's infallibility with universal jurisdiction as opposed to a man-made rank of the infallible church's divinely instituted episcopate, a rank for the good order of the church).

Where--precisely--does it say this? And if there is such a document, please explain why the Holy See would allow the primates of two of its largest Eastern Churches to dissent from it? And all this being the case, does it not mean that Rome is being cynically disingenuous in its dialogue with the Orthodox, particularly when it repeatedly asserts that communion with Rome would mean neither subordination nor assimilation, but true communion in the Holy Spirit? And what, precisely, did John Paul II mean, in Ut Unum Sint, when he called for assistance from the "separated brethren" in finding a definition and modality of primacy suitable for the third millennium? Window dressing?

If so, I certainly don't want to be in communion with a Church that deals in falsehoods.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
Quote
I have never been to an Eastern Rite Roman Catholic Church- been to a Eastern Catholic Church.

Visit some of the older churches in the Metropolia--it usually says something of that sort on the cornerstone or lintel of the building--"St. So-and-So Roman Catholic Church (Greek Rite)".

On the other hand, if you look in some of the old Slavonic Trebniki and Sluzhebniki, they almost always refer to the "Greek Catholic Orthodox Church"--which, interestingly, is precisely how the Johnstown Archdiocese refers to itself: The Carpatho-Rusyn Greek Catholic Orthodox Archdiocese (Ecumenical Patriarchate).

So, what's in a name?

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
Quote
Always consider that there is a difference between saying that a Latin dogma or doctrine (whether given by a Council or other method) is poorly defined and in need of better definition and saying it is heresy.

One also has to consider that, as a result of its ecclesiastical separation from the Eastern Churches, the Church of Rome became rather sloppy in its theological terminology, assigning the word "dogma" to matters that pertain only to the usage of that particular Church, or its own specific interpretation and enunciation of a universal doctrine of the Church.

This was precisely the point Pope John Paul II was explaining when he said that we must be careful not to confuse the underlying truth of doctrine with its linguistically, socially and historically conditioned modes of expression. There is only one way in which to do this: objective and ecumenical analysis of the development of doctrine. Unless you understand the conditions under which a particular doctrine or statement was made--its historical, social and ecclesiastical context--it is impossible to determine whether it is in fact a statement that pertains to dogma, to the doctrinal expression of a particular Church, or merely to its proper liturgical usage.


Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 2
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,029
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by Administrator
PS: Anyone wishing to meet an Orthodox in Communion with Rome is welcome to stop by my house. I keep cold drinks and with a bit of notice I could put some chicken or steak on the grill. The deck is shady after about 4 PM. Very nice!

Unfortunately, the map just keeps getting in the way . . .

hawk, struggling for a reason to be near Virginia . . .

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by ebed melech
Yes, without accepting all of your characterizations or qualifications as valid.
Which "characterizations" or "qualifications" do you reject?

By the way, I remain open to hearing your defense of the Tridentine theories, and even those of Vatican I, but I expect your answers to founded upon the teachings of the Eastern Fathers, and not simply a reiteration of the views of the Scholastics.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by The young fogey
OicwRs: Greek Catholic converts online.
This is a common method used by some Latin apologists in order to try and marginalize Eastern Catholics who reject the idea that Latin theories are dogmas.

I assure you that I exist off-line.

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
OP Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
Apotheoun,

Here is a link to a Latin Catholic's explanation and reconciliation of "created" grace: http://mliccione.blogspot.com/2008/03/that-little-black-spot.html

Stuart, I do plan to answer your questions later (though it is the first time you've asked them, and you sneakily framed it as if you've asked them of me tons of times, and that I'm resisting). Very sly!

Alexis

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by Logos - Alexis
Apotheoun,

Here is a link to a Latin Catholic's explanation and reconciliation of "created" grace: http://mliccione.blogspot.com/2008/03/that-little-black-spot.html

Stuart, I do plan to answer your questions later (though it is the first time you've asked them, and you sneakily framed it as if you've asked them of me tons of times, and that I'm resisting). Very sly!

Alexis
Thank you for the link, but alas I have already read Liccione's articles.

As an Eastern Christian I believe that grace is God Himself given to man as energy, and so there is no such thing as "created" grace. In fact, the Scholastic theories surrounding "created" grace have Arian and Pneumatomachian tendencies in that the Scholastics proposed their theory of grace as a created habitus as a buffer between God and man, while the Eastern teaching – as proposed by St. Gregory Palamas – holds that man becomes uncreated by grace (see St. Gregory's "Third Letter to Akindynos").

P.S. - A better treatment (and defense) of "created" grace can be found in a book called "The Theology of Grace" by C. Moeller and G. Philips, but even that book reveals the truth that the ancient Church had no concept of "created" grace, and that Eastern Orthodox theology has worked fine without such a concept for two thousand years.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
Why is "created grace" a theological issue, unless one side or the other elevates it to one? Things that were not issues in the first millennium should not be issues today. Latins should be allowed to theologize as Latins; Greeks should be allowed to theologize as Greeks; Orientals should be allowed to theologize as Orientals; and Assyrians should be allowed to theologize as Assyrians. No one Tradition can impose its modes of expression on any other Tradition. It is one of the more annoying traits of some Orthodox that they do not seem to recognize the legitimacy of any theology that is not explicitly Byzantine; in this, they are no better than certain Latins who do not recognize the legitimacy of any theology that is not explicitly Latin.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by StuartK
Why is "created grace" a theological issue, unless one side or the other elevates it to one? Things that were not issues in the first millennium should not be issues today. Latins should be allowed to theologize as Latins; Greeks should be allowed to theologize as Greeks; Orientals should be allowed to theologize as Orientals; and Assyrians should be allowed to theologize as Assyrians. No one Tradition can impose its modes of expression on any other Tradition. It is one of the more annoying traits of some Orthodox that they do not seem to recognize the legitimacy of any theology that is not explicitly Byzantine; in this, they are no better than certain Latins who do not recognize the legitimacy of any theology that is not explicitly Latin.
I agree, but sadly there are Latin Catholics, and even some Eastern Catholics, who accept the teaching of Trent as dogma, and Trent does teach a concept of "created" grace in its decree on Justification.

That said, as an Eastern Catholic I reject the idea that Trent is truly ecumenical, and hold instead that its decrees espouse Latin (mainly Scholastic) theological theories, which no one outside the Latin Church is required to accept.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
Well, so much for Trent (which taught a lot of things that have nothing to do with the Eastern Churches). But the Catholic Church has accepted Palamism as an acceptable mode of theology for Churches of the Byzantine Tradition, and has recognized Palamas as a saint of the universal Church, and since we commemorate him on the Second Sunday of Lent, the issue is entirely moot--the nature of grace is not a worthy subject for dogmatization.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by StuartK
Well, so much for Trent (which taught a lot of things that have nothing to do with the Eastern Churches). But the Catholic Church has accepted Palamism as an acceptable mode of theology for Churches of the Byzantine Tradition, and has recognized Palamas as a saint of the universal Church, and since we commemorate him on the Second Sunday of Lent, the issue is entirely moot--the nature of grace is not a worthy subject for dogmatization.
Although I agree with you, I am concerned by many of the posts that I read here at the Byzantine Forum which seem to take a contrary view.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
I can only say that I believe that grace is God, because nothing other than participation in the uncreated divinity itself could divinize a man.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
Grace is, before all else, the gift of the Holy Spirit, which is to say, the descent and action of the Spirit within each individual person.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,010
C
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,010
Originally Posted by StuartK
On the other hand, if you look in some of the old Slavonic Trebniki and Sluzhebniki, they almost always refer to the "Greek Catholic Orthodox Church"--which, interestingly, is precisely how the Johnstown Archdiocese refers to itself: The Carpatho-Rusyn Greek Catholic Orthodox Archdiocese (Ecumenical Patriarchate).

If I remember correctly, the original name was the "American Carpatho-Russian Greek Catholic Diocese of the Eastern Rite." Soon after its reception into the EP--although not immediately after--the word "Orthodox" was added; I think that the official title is still the "American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Diocese of the USA."

Today, "American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese" or ACROD is most common.

Dave

Page 2 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Moderated by  Alice, Father Deacon Ed, theophan 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5