The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Lillian, ROCOR man, comehavebreakfast, EasternAquinas2, JasJac
5,876 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 members (1 invisible), 102 guests, and 18 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
Posts415,270
Members5,876
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,708
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,708
Quote
They'll need a Pope Leo to get through this one!

No, what they need is an emperor. They don't need a pope. I am an eastern Catholic who has a pope. Take our pope...please? I don't think we are in better shape than the Orthodox because we have a pope.

Last edited by byzanTN; 06/20/16 02:35 PM.
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,177
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,177
Originally Posted by byzanTN
No, what they need is an emperor.

Which could be read: "We can't (won't) get along with each other so we need an external power to force us to work together."

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,921
Likes: 28
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,921
Likes: 28
Christ is in our midst!!

I have read this thread with sorrow and continue to pray for the desired outcome of this Great Council for our Orthodox brethren, whatever the Holy Spirit wants it to be for them.

Bob

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
With my comment about Constantine, I meant that he called the council of Nicaea and asked for them to come up with a common creed which most of the bishops present could accept. In essence,his action created united church which he could use as the basis of the Roman state religion. In this sense, he established the church. Before Nicaea, there really was no united church.

A number of years ago, Bob (theophan) posted a piece here on what a reunited church would be like and, if I remember correctly, it stressed or implied a conciliar model I would hope he would reprint it here or give us a link to it. I personally like the way orthodoxy operates, even if seems messy to those who like the lock step approach of the Vatican. I urge all of you to check into the affair of Apiarius in North Africa in which Aurelius Augustinus (Augustine of Hippo) told the bishop of Rome to stay out of the affairs of the church of North Africa. I have left out all details so review them. some historians have called this event end of conciliar governance in the western church.

Last edited by johnzonaras; 06/23/16 12:28 PM.
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,921
Likes: 28
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,921
Likes: 28
johnzonaras:

Christ is in our midst!!

I don't remember the original thread in which I posted this set of remarks, but found it in another where I'd re-posted it. I hope this is what you refer to.

Quote
Christ is in our midst!!

When one works really hard to understand the point of view of another, he really understands when he can pose the other's position in concrete terms. Some time ago, I posted this on another thread dealing with what future communion ought to look like from an Orthodox perspective.

1. In the event of full communion, there will be no Eastern bishop who will report to the Roman patriarchate for any reason whatsoever. If Rome has something to say to a specific bishop, it can be addressed to the relevant patriarch in whose synod that bishop is a member. In ordinary matters, that will not happen.
2. There will be no issue whatsoever of any Eastern bishop having to answer to anyone but his own synod over who he accepts for priestly formation nor who he ordains. The Eastern Churches are fully capable of making their own decisions in these areas based on their own canons and traditions.
3. In the event of full communion, there will be no issue with any man transfering to another bishop if he feels called to Holy Orders and the decision to accept or reject him will be entirely up to the bishop he approaches without any appeal or interference from Rome. so if a Latin man is rejected because he is married and an Eastern bishop feels he has what it takes and accepts him, there will be no comment from his former Latin bishop or from Rome.
4. In the event of full communion, the Oriental Congregation that has been the Roman Patriarch's medium of dealing with Eastern Churches in full communion up to that time will be abolished. The Pope can feel free to send a delegation to another patriarch to discuss any concerns he may have, but there will be no jurisdictional authority to interfere in the internal workings of another patriarchate unless based on the ancient canons wherein Rome is a last resort for certain limited matters. If Rome wants some sort of regular contact with other patriarchs, an ad hoc committee can be set up, but with no authority other than that granted by the patriarchs involved.
5. In the event Rome does not like these concrete statements of how life in renewed communion will be, then it will be Rome's fault that full communion cannot be achieved.

From an Orthodox perspective, the problem with the development in the Roman Church in the second millenium is that the Pope acts as if the Lord made Peter the overseer of the other Apostles in such a way that they could do nothing without his permission. Such is not the case. While he is supposed to support his brethren in the Faith, he is not their master.

Bob

I remember another thread about how things would function within regions--with the various bishops of Apostolic Churches functioning in a synodal style in their area and without outside interference from larger bodies except in special circumstances--but I cannot find it.

Last edited by theophan; 06/24/16 08:44 AM. Reason: additional thought
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 73
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 73
Can anyone speak to the veracity of the source of this letter? Sam Noble, perhaps? I am, frankly, astounded if it is true.

My Chains the Bond of Unity [pemptousia.com]

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 396
Thank you, Bob. This was the piece I was talking about.

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 40
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 40
The translation doesn't make it as clear as it should be, but the letter is written in his name, as a kind of literary trope, by his relative, Met Siluan (Muci) of Buenos Aires.

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 73
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 73
Thank you, I thought that might be the case.

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Father Anthony 

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