www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Recent interview with Fr. Taft

Definitely. It's like I always say: if I had been born Orthodox I wouldn't switch to Catholicism ... but doesn't necessarily mean that I'm going to leave Catholicism for Orthodoxy either.

Why would it need to be more? (I could go into other problems with your comparison, but I won't.)

The Communists gave up.

From the doyen of Orthodox in communion with Rome. Gotta admire your tenacity; most OicwRs quickly get fed up and 'dox, because the OicwR position doesn't make sense. You've been at it for going on 20 years. The OicwR position: being a good Catholic or a good Orthodox, accepting the true-church claim (which doesn't necessarily mean being narrow or a jerk about it), is 'reflexiveley reactionary'; thinking you know better than either Catholicism or Orthodoxy is cool. Whatever, Stu. Χριστός Ανέστη.

^reflexively

I guess Kudos are really due to Stuart if that title belongs to him -- considering some of the other contendors for it.

^contenders

The difference between us, Sergei, is I know my history, and my history informs my ecclesiology. All you've got left is polemics.

I can't think of any with his staying power.

'OicwR' like all cant needs to be explained to newcomers. Some well-meaning Greek Catholics, usually converts, call themselves that but mean something a little different, namely, exactly what Rome wants Greek Catholicism to be: liturgically all Orthodox, with no latinizations, while expressing all of Catholic doctrine, including of course the post-schism definitions, in Byzantine terms. (Which good Orthodox think is impossible, which is why they're Orthodox.) I sometimes call it high-church Greek Catholicism. Either this board's house position or pretty close to it. OicwRs look like that but dissent from post-schism Catholic definitions of doctrine, siding with the Orthodox but remaining nominally Catholic. Basically Protestant private judgement that uses the Byzantine Rite.

So only you and those who agree with you understand the history; Catholicism and Orthodoxy are for idiots?

Dear Sergei,

Xpuctoc Bockpece!

If by "Protestant private judgment" you mean that EC's pick and choose what to believe and how to worship - then OK, I see your point.

I don't see how EC's who want to be faithful to Eastern Christian tradition are unfaithful to it when they compare the Western Immaculate Conception dogma and say that the East has different a priori's but that ultimately both sides come down to the same thing - that the Most Holy Theotokos is precisely that, Most Holy and without any stain of sin (understood in the Western Augustinian sense).

If EC's or "Orthodox in communion with Rome" see the papacy in less than a triumphalist view (which is not to say there are EC's who actually do prefer the triumphalist paradigm), Rome hasn't yet excommunicated us for it. And we've learned over the years, as Particular Churches, that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission when it comes to nominating our own bishops, having married priests etc.

It's not perfect, but then again, who said the "Unia structure" was meant to be a permanent thing? Certainly not Rome these days, as you well know.

I respect your uncompromising witness to the integrity of Eastern Orthodoxy.

And I included a thread with an interview about the possible canonization of Jan Hus here which you might find interesting or even annoying!

Good to hear from you sir!

Alex

You mean Stuart or Pat. Gregory?

(For the record, I would have preferred if His Beatitude had said "Catholic with a plus" rather than "Orthodox with a plus", but for some reason he doesn't always take my advice. )

I feel the objections, from both sides, to those who are "Orthodox in communion with Rome" almost work, but not quite. The objections from the Orthodox don't quite make it, because I never left Orthodoxy. (Like I said, if I had been born into Orthodoxy, I wouldn't have left it, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to jump ships in the other direction. Although that may not matter to those Orthodox who seem to treat all ECs as if we were ex-Orthodox.) On the other hand, some Catholics like (or love) to criticize "OicwR" for staying in communion with Rome, which makes sense if they're willing to apply the same criticism to Rome for staying in communion with "OicwR".

Воистинну воскресе!


I'm not saying all Greek Catholics pick and choose which Catholic doctrines to believe. That's neither the official Greek Catholic position nor the opinion of most Greek Catholics. I mean the 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' represented by Stuart do.


That's not OicwR but good high-church Greek Catholicism: affirming Catholic doctrine but expressing it in Byzantinese, trying to reconcile the two churches. Exactly what Rome wants. OicwR side with Orthodox polemics and deny the Immaculate Conception.


Again, not a problem. Catholicism doesn't necessarily mean ultramontanism, and explaining that in Orthodox terms is part of Greek Catholics' apostolate.

Of course the Unia structure is meant to be temporary. Catholicism's goal is to bring the whole Orthodox Church back. Claiming to be the true church, it can do no less.

Their hardliners are allowed, according to their doctrine. I'm trying to be fair as in any good debate. Not to present Orthodoxy as I or somebody else might want it, but as it is, without being nasty. Only fair to a church I'd like to see reteach traditionalism to the West.

I mean Stuart. My guess is Patriarch Gregory wasn't an OicwR but a good high-church Greek Catholic: liturgically Orthodox, doctrinally Catholic.

The OicwRs are like the Anglo-Papalist Anglicans were. They are dissenters in their own church and hypocrites for staying outside the church they say they believe in. Catholicism doesn't go after dissenters unless they cause scandal (if they are in a position to know better, are in a position of authority and trust, and have been warned).

Love it.

Opinions will undoubtedly vary on this; but I'm thinking you'd be right if you changed "deny" to "not affirm".