The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
AlexAba, AlexA, Nicholas Schaeffer, Regf2, SomeInquirer
5,884 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 60 guests, and 17 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
Topics35,221
Posts415,306
Members5,884
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
E
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
Offline
Za myr z'wysot ...
Member
E
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
One of the complaints sometimes voiced by Orthodox with respect to the movement for the restoration of communion between Rome and Orthodoxy is that, despite the advances achieved theologically by the ecumenical commissions, Rome has done not a single thing to implement any of them and so demonstrate its good will to take its own perspectives delineated in Vatican II and since seriously at all.
Perhaps it's time for the ecumenical commissions to start taking a more pastoral approach--to start going over the things they've done theologically, develop some concrete pastoral strategies for implementing them, and then distribute these recommendations among the Catholic and Orthodox bishops for their comments and buy-in.

It's a thought ...


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Originally Posted by Epiphanius
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
One of the complaints sometimes voiced by Orthodox with respect to the movement for the restoration of communion between Rome and Orthodoxy is that, despite the advances achieved theologically by the ecumenical commissions, Rome has done not a single thing to implement any of them and so demonstrate its good will to take its own perspectives delineated in Vatican II and since seriously at all.
Perhaps it's time for the ecumenical commissions to start taking a more pastoral approach--to start going over the things they've done theologically, develop some concrete pastoral strategies for implementing them, and then distribute these recommendations among the Catholic and Orthodox bishops for their comments and buy-in.

It's a thought ...


Peace,
Deacon Richard

A very good thought, Rev. Fr Deacon! smile

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Originally Posted by MariaCatherine
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
A major problem that Eastern Christians (and also Latin Catholics engaged in Catholic-Orthodox dialogue) have with Fatima is not the apparitions and teachings themselves, but with how certain Fatimist groups have interpreted them.
What source would you recommend for a proper interpretation of Fatima?

Fr. Robert Fox and also the literature of the Blue Army (World Fatima Apostolate).

I think that these have brought a much more ecumenical spirit to the message of Fatima, while reducing the "triumphalism" formerly apparent in other interpretations.

I like the Blue Army's new catechism on Fatima.

Notwithstanding, the damage has been done with respect to Orthodox-Catholic relations on this score. The Vatican scrupulously avoids any mention of Fatima to the Orthodox and even St John Paul II, in his excellent letter on the Rosary, makes NO mention of even the Fatima decade prayer - despite the fact that he had a life-long devotion to Our Lady of Fatima.

Alex

Last edited by Orthodox Catholic; 12/18/15 04:06 PM.
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Originally Posted by Parresia
Originally Posted by Peter J
Originally Posted by bergschlawiner
What would it take for the Papacy to take a step back from "infallibility" and perhaps redefine this claim?
Well, logically, Rome cannot consider Vatican I to be an ecumenical council but not affirm what it said about PI. That's a significant obstacle.

It would be helpful for pretty much everyone to read Gasser's relatio on Papal Infallibility that was used at Vatican I. There is way too much misunderstanding out there about the doctrine.

The theory of the Papacy is one thing - its exercise quite another.

Most importantly, the most pressing ecumenical issue here is the centralized Roman authority over the EC Churches and the resulting "tension" that ensues when Rome is seen to be saying one thing, and certain Particular Churches do another (i.e. the UGCC).

The UGCC is large enough and more than capable enough of handling its own affairs - in the Ukrainian homeland and in the diaspora - without Rome's meddling, thank you very much.

When Rome appoints a new UGCC bishop for the diaspora, over and above the heads of the UGCC Synod, such uneasiness on our part is more than self-evident.

Rome can and should abolish the Eastern Churches Congregation (its historical past is quite nefarious) and let the Patriarchs and Primates of the EC Churches do what only they know how to do best - govern their own flocks. If there are small EC Churches who need support - they can easily get it from some of the larger EC Particular Churches without having recourse to a Roman congregation.

The same thing MIGHT be said of the Ruthenian Catholics in the U.S.

Their bishops, if I'm not mistaken, would rather go to Rome to have the Pope impose their pallia, rather than, say, the Patriarch/Primate of the UGCC (whom they appear to want to avoid at all costs).

But why? Isn't this biting off one's nose to spite one's face?

Alex

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,924
Likes: 29
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,924
Likes: 29
Quote
centralized Roman authority

This issue should have been apparent after the recent worldwide synod on the family. The final document was submitted to Pope Francis and the comment in the media said that he had no obligation to issue it as it was presented since a synod was only advisory. It was also noted that all bishops in communion govern and teach "cum et sub Petro": with and under Peter.

With this same approach after all that Vatican II said or seemed to say, there will never be any change for the EC Churches and never be any communion with the Orthodox Churches.

Bob

Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 11
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
Fr. Robert Fox and also the literature of the Blue Army (World Fatima Apostolate).
How close were their people to Sr. Lucia?

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear Bob,

Not necessarily. IF Rome could differentiate between how the papacy operates as the primate for the universal Latin Church and then as the Petrine primacy - the problem you cite could possibly be resolved

Let's remember that the Moscow patriarchate operates very much like a centralized authority with visions of being the "third Rome."

In addition, "communion with Orthodoxy" presupposes an Orthodox agreement on primacy to begin with.

And there is no such agreement.

It would likewise be naive of us to believe that regardless of what Rome does, the Moscow Patriarchate, under the current political conditions in which it is obliged to live and work, will NEVER agree to any sort of union/communion with Rome. That is simply not in the books given the resumption of full state-control of Russian Orthodoxy.

Suffice it to say that the Moscow Patriarch exercises his authority very much like that of a pope. The teaching of papal jurisdiction isn't there in Orthodoxy, but that doesn't prevent the Patriarch from closely approximating a papalist style of governing.

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317
Likes: 21
Dear MariaCatherine,

I don't know how close they were to Sr. Lucia. I do know that Sr. Lucia was very close to the Church and submitted herself perfectly to the judgement of the Church.

Fatima is an approved apparition, of course, but it does not, and cannot, add anything to the deposit of Faith. The only thing it does is call people to prayer and penance - something the Church is called upon to do in every generation - and to devotion to the Most Holy Mother of God etc.

Only the Church may interpret and approve (or not) apparitions and other events.

Fr. Fox and the World Fatima Apostolate are likewise under full obedience to the Magisterium.

That's more than good enough for me - how about you?

Alex

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 2
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 2
I am a Roman Rite Catholic and I would 100% support regularly ordaining married men to the priesthood, dropping the filioque or modifying it (from 'and the Son', to 'through the Son', bringing back minor orders like the subdeaconate, doing away with extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, and re aligning Chris mating to directly after baptism and giving infants and children the Eucharist.

If we implemented all those changes, I think it would show serious initiative on our part toward reconciliation and restoration of full sacramental Communion.

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,924
Likes: 29
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,924
Likes: 29
Jason:

Christ is in our midst!!

I think there is much more that Latin Catholics need to do in order to move along full communion with the Eastern Churches. Some have expressed horror at the liturgical practices that have become prevalent in the past 50+ years. There are some YouTube videos that compare the reverence of Orthodox celebrations with some far-out Latin celebrations that will make you cringe.

The filioque has been discussed to death here, but I believe that the major point left is that of Rome making a unilateral change to a statement of faith that was ratified by all the churches gathered in council. Additionally, history shows that the change was not completely universal in the West until after the Great Schism.

Some of the other things you mention will be a real challenge because they have become so accepted in the West and probably would be greeted with the same resistance to being changed as the calendar question is in the East.

There is an additional point that does not surface but which would also have to be addressed: feminizing language. It was a major roadblock to a common translation of the Byzantine Divine Liturgy and other services when it was proposed by Father Robert Taft, S.J., formerly a faculty member at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome. The Orthodox Churches wanted none of it.

Bob

Last edited by theophan; 02/13/16 02:41 PM. Reason: additional comment
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4

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