|
1 members (San Nicolas),
314
guests, and
43
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,394
Posts416,751
Members5,993
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 357
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 357 |
Somebody should ask Metropolitan Gennadios Zervos of The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy what his thoughts are on canonical territories and expansionism.
This stuff is so silly in the year 2013. The irony is that union would by definition end this controversy. The only logical conclusion is that the ROC has no interest in it. Feet firmly rooted in the past. Union at any cost? And no, it is not the only logical conclusion, just a very one sided conclusion. And it is a complement for a Church to have its "feet firmly rooted in the past." What cost? Unless I misunderstand you, I get the impression that union is at the forefront of any matter. And all problems should be overlooked for the sake of union. Why not ask a simple question, does the dear Metropolitan believe the church is divided?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 357
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 357 |
Somebody should ask Metropolitan Gennadios Zervos of The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy what his thoughts are on canonical territories and expansionism.
This stuff is so silly in the year 2013. The irony is that union would by definition end this controversy. The only logical conclusion is that the ROC has no interest in it. Feet firmly rooted in the past. Union at any cost? And no, it is not the only logical conclusion, just a very one sided conclusion. And it is a complement for a Church to have its "feet firmly rooted in the past." What cost? Now you have been around for some time. Is that a question or a statement of personal belief? I can understand it, if it is your personal belief, but not all share it. And before we get into dredging up all of the old arguments, I do believe this is a non-story. Of course there is the other sides perspective and ignoring it creates a story.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 839
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 839 |
I would expect an Orthodox prelate to be opposed to the unia.
As long as "Western Rite Orthodox" exist, I have trouble seeing the reason for the upset. Do have the same trouble seeing the difference between duress and accommodation? You think the Ukranian Catholic Church exists today because its members are under duress? Not relevant: the WRO never existed because they were under duress.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844 |
Well, let's not forget the history that Pope Francis and Patriarch Sviatoslav had back in their days in Argentina. They've been good, long-standing friends and I think they did serve together, if I remember history well enough. Maybe that might have been what Metropolitan Hilarion was jealous about, due to that bias, supposedly. I still wonder what Patriarch Kyrill thinks about this whole thing, since he is Metropolitan Hilarion's superior.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209 |
Not relevant: the WRO never existed because they were under duress. Certainly not irrelevant, to be fair. It's not only fair but also essential to point out that the Ukranian Catholic Church was dissolved only under duress, and that this experience is one of the obstacles--or difficulties, at least--in imagining a reunion and one of the factors behind the current difficulties. But, I agree with your more basic point--the Western Rite Orthodox and the Eastern Catholic Churches are not really equivalent.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209 |
Well, let's not forget the history that Pope Francis and Patriarch Sviatoslav had back in their days in Argentina. I think you are right that the close personal history of Pope Francis with the UGCC probably has something to do with just how quick and forceful Metropolitan Hilarion's comments were.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848 |
Well, let's not forget the history that Pope Francis and Patriarch Sviatoslav had back in their days in Argentina. They've been good, long-standing friends and I think they did serve together, if I remember history well enough. Maybe that might have been what Metropolitan Hilarion was jealous about, due to that bias, supposedly. I still wonder what Patriarch Kyrill thinks about this whole thing, since he is Metropolitan Hilarion's superior. He agrees entirely. http://risu.org.ua/en/index/all_news/confessional/interchurch_relations/46561/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209 |
I agree that Metropolitan Hilarion's remarks agree substantially with Patriarch Kirill's, though I do think the tone is different. (And, His Holiness may propose a somewhat more measured requirement--'"conflicts need to be resolved more energetically, if not fully..." for a productive meeting to take place.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 700 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 700 Likes: 2 |
Somebody should ask Metropolitan Gennadios Zervos of The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy what his thoughts are on canonical territories and expansionism.
This stuff is so silly in the year 2013. The irony is that union would by definition end this controversy. The only logical conclusion is that the ROC has no interest in it. Feet firmly rooted in the past. Union at any cost? And no, it is not the only logical conclusion, just a very one sided conclusion. And it is a complement for a Church to have its "feet firmly rooted in the past." What cost? Now you have been around for some time. Is that a question or a statement of personal belief? I can understand it, if it is your personal belief, but not all share it. And before we get into dredging up all of the old arguments, I do believe this is a non-story. Of course there is the other sides perspective and ignoring it creates a story. It's a question.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848 |
I think the real reason for the tone of Met. Hilarion's remarks is that he is perceived by some Orthodox as being sympathetic to Greek Catholics; thus he goes in harder on them in public statements to prop up his internal reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 700 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 700 Likes: 2 |
Somebody should ask Metropolitan Gennadios Zervos of The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy what his thoughts are on canonical territories and expansionism. Why? Because he's a learned man. No other reason having to do with churches having a presence in another church's cannonical territory. We already have the thoughts of one learned man on the matter, namely Metropolitan Hilarion's. Any reason we should abandon his eminence's for anything Met. Gennadios has to say on the matter? This stuff is so silly in the year 2013. Why? Have canonical jurisdictions and boundaries been done away with? See above. Anything in particular I should be sifting for? The answer to your question. The irony is that union would by definition end this controversy. Oh? How's that. Because they would all be Ukranian Christians united in one church. So all the Latin ordinaries will pack up and leave? Why would they need to if they were part of the newly unified church? The only logical conclusion is that the ROC has no interest in it. Not quite. Quite. Just own it, so much better to be straight forward. The holy monks on Mt Athos would agree, there's no shame in not desiring unity if it is based on principle, misguided though it may be. Hot or cold is always better than lukewarm. It seems all the complaining is that the ROC is too hot for some people, and it's not going to let cold water be thrown on it for someone else's idea of unity that was rejected back in 1441. You don't have to read so much into it. What's the point of kicking out all the Catholics, Latin or otherwise, only to then unite with them after the fact? Let's call a spade a spade, unity to the Russians means becoming Orthodox, period. Feet firmly rooted in the past. Better than wobbly legs disconnected from their past. When the past is one of pain and bitterness, not at all. When you walk down a path of pain and bitterness, you learn not to wander off down it again. Or you should. Wobbly legs can strengthen. It takes work and a desire to accomplish, which I see little evidence of. perhaps you just don't desire what you see. That's true enough of what I am looking at here. On the flip side... Give the Russians Ukraine in return for communion and call them all Catholic... Who cares? Keeping two ancient, holy and apostolic churches separated over a local spat is silly. What local spat would that be? The one we're talking about, Ukraine. We don't believe in "two" apostolic churches, we confess the Faith in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Then why the worry about canonical territories? Because you see only the Orthodox Church as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and any outside of it (including other Orthodox) as outside the faith. Union, therefore, means coming to your side of the fence. Again, let's just call a spade a spade, it makes things so much simpler.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844 |
Well, then again, there are Russian Greek-Catholics, too, what would their take be in all this? That's going to be interesting to see what happens there...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 839
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 839 |
Anything in particular I should be sifting for? The answer to your question. I don't have any questions, as Met. Hilarion left none. Because they would all be Ukranian Christians united in one church. So all the Latin ordinaries will pack up and leave? Why would they need to if they were part of the newly unified church? Why are they there now, outside of the UGCC in their present unified communion with the "supreme authority of the church" they recognize in Pastor Aeternus? It seems all the complaining is that the ROC is too hot for some people, and it's not going to let cold water be thrown on it for someone else's idea of unity that was rejected back in 1441. You don't have to read so much into it. What's the point of kicking out all the Catholics, Latin or otherwise, only to then unite with them after the fact? Let's call a spade a spade, unity to the Russians means becoming Orthodox, period. The Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils set that standard: why should the Russians-or any Orthodox Catholic-abandon it? Wobbly legs can strengthen. It takes work and a desire to accomplish, which I see little evidence of. perhaps you just don't desire what you see. That's true enough of what I am looking at here. Well, can't help you there. On the flip side... Give the Russians Ukraine in return for communion and call them all Catholic... Who cares? Keeping two ancient, holy and apostolic churches separated over a local spat is silly. What local spat would that be? The one we're talking about, Ukraine. No spat: we're all agreed that at present Ukraine belongs to the Patriarchate of Moscow. We don't believe in "two" apostolic churches, we confess the Faith in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Then why the worry about canonical territories? The good order of the Church (taxis) set up by the Apostles and Fathers. Because you see only the Orthodox Church as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and any outside of it (including other Orthodox) as outside the faith. Union, therefore, means coming to your side of the fence.
Again, let's just call a spade a spade, it makes things so much simpler. I do nothing but, and I don't even have to ask Met. Gennadios.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 209 |
At some point, it'd be nice if we could agree to talk to each other, rather than past each other. Essential for dialogue.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953 |
At some point, it'd be nice if we could agree to talk to each other, rather than past each other. Essential for dialogue. Many of us do try to do just that.
|
|
|
|
|
