FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: It's good to be a Melkite
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Archbishop Nicholas laying down the law on first communion practices.

https://melkite.org/wp-content/uploads/2...013012.pdf
Good on Archbishop Nicholas!
I made this for you:

[Image: mememelkite.png]

(02-12-2012, 11:30 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote: [ -> ]I made this for you:

[Image: mememelkite.png]

That's awesome!  I can even hear him saying that in my head in a little Arabic accent that's vaguely reminscent of Mel Brooks!
It is about as spiritually motivated as any fully modernist Novus Ordo bishop. 

No mention of the pastoral care of souls and what is best for people. 

The only concern is to remove any Tradition of the Church that may have come from or grown in the Latin Church and remove it regardless of the benefit it may have. 

Pride in being Melkite is more important than the shared faith it seems.  Removing the "taint" of the Latin Church seems to be more important than ridding souls of sin.

I don't have a problem with any Church returning to an older practice if it is indeed going to give more good fruit, but archealogism is not a good reason and I was hoping to read something about the "meaning" of the tradition. 

But the sour note is the not so subtle tactic of running down the Latin tradition and misrepresenting it  as a  mere "party" instead of a "rite of passage" that it actually is. 

If the situation were reversed and a Traditional Latin bishop were to denounce every influence of the Eastern Churches in a diocese,  only the least Catholic in mentality would support him.  He would be a scandal that would probably cause Rome to unseat him. 

Imagine a Latin Bishop saying, "Be proud to be a Latin Catholic, We're going to "De-Easternize" our Churches,  we need to get those flat and simple drawings out of our Churches because we have good art in the Latin Church!"
He would be a scandal to any right thinking Catholic of any rite.


(02-13-2012, 12:18 AM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]It is about as spiritually motivated as any fully modernist Novus Ordo bishop. 

No mention of the pastoral care of souls and what is best for people. 

The only concern is to remove any Tradition of the Church that may have come from or grown in the Latin Church and remove it regardless of the benefit it may have. 

Pride in being Melkite is more important than the shared faith it seems.  Removing the "taint" of the Latin Church seems to be more important than ridding souls of sin.

I don't have a problem with any Church returning to an older practice if it is indeed going to give more good fruit, but archealogism is not a good reason and I was hoping to read something about the "meaning" of the tradition. 

But the sour note is the not so subtle tactic of running down the Latin tradition and misrepresenting it  as a  mere "party" instead of a "rite of passage" that it actually is. 

If the situation were reversed and a Traditional Latin bishop were to denounce every influence of the Eastern Churches in a diocese,  only the least Catholic in mentality would support him.  He would be a scandal that would probably cause Rome to unseat him. 

Imagine a Latin Bishop saying, "Be proud to be a Latin Catholic, We're going to "De-Easternize" our Churches,  we need to get those flat and simple drawings out of our Churches because we have good art in the Latin Church!"
He would be a scandal to any right thinking Catholic of any rite.

No, the only concern is not to remove any tradition that may have come from the Latin Church, although, I can see why you might think that if you're not familiar with the reasons behind Byzantine traditions.  Keep in mind, this was a pastoral letter written by a Melkite bishop to Melkite priests and laity, so this is why you didn't read a detailed explanation of the tradition in it.  I think it's presumed that at least the priests, if not the faithful, are already familiar with the reason behind the tradition from when Archbishop Joseph initially implemented this in the '70s. 

The reason why Archbishop Nicholas is doing this is precisely for the pastoral care of souls and ridding them of sin.  What better way to rid a soul of sin than to receive Christ, body, blood, soul and divinity, from the moment of baptism, before sin has a chance to firmly take hold again?  7-12 years is a lot of time for Satan to move in and dick around with things, so to speak.

Reception of the Eucharist, and confirmation,  for that matter, are not rites of passage though.  That may be the common understanding among Latin faithful, but it is an ignorant one.  Confirmation, or in this case, reception of the Eucharist, are not the Catholic version of a bar mitzvah.  Even Latin bishops and theologians recognize that idea as an error.

If a Latin bishop were to do the same thing, why would he be a scandal?  Granted, Latin Catholics never adopted the amount of Eastern traditions as Eastern Catholics were forced to adopt from the West, but even if you had, what would be wrong with the Latins deciding to return to their own tradition and abandon the Eastern one?  I think anyone, Western or Eastern, would be wrong to be scandalized by that.
Melkite!!!!!!!!!!  Love your new avatar, brah! 
(02-13-2012, 01:34 AM)Mithrandylan Wrote: [ -> ]Melkite!!!!!!!!!!  Love your new avatar, brah! 

Me too!  Thanks for making it!
The Latin Rite ought to confirm and commune babies.  It's traditional.
Ridiculous.

They're just playing into the hands of the Eastern Orthodox. It's the old Eastern intellectual scleorosis all over again. Remove any "taint" from Latin traditions.

Is Nicholas going to suppress the rosary too? That is, if he even prays that perverse latinism!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20