Bulgarian Orthodox want reunion with Rome ASAP
#11
(10-23-2009, 01:21 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: Wow! God is moving in our times!! What a turn of events, this week. Will the SSPX be next? Are all our prayers for unity finally being answered?

:pray2:

It is interesting that many SSPX supporters say something to the effect that there is no real division betwen Rome and the SSPX, or at the very least no schismatic tendencies to see here move on, and then make a comparison betwen the unity of the SSPX with Rome and the Orthodox
with Rome who everyone here agrees are at least formally schismatic.


The question is:  "Will the SSPX be next?"

Reply
#12
The answer is "no"...the real question is....Will Rome be next?!
Reply
#13
(10-23-2009, 11:57 PM)Scipio_a Wrote: The answer is "no"...the real question is....Will Rome be next?!

Are you saying Rome is not in communion with Rome? :laughing:
Reply
#14
I would be more cautious in evaluating this, because the news article from July does not mean that the Bulgarian Bishop isn't interested in union, what it could mean is that he has not confidence in the Ecumenical infrastructure. They talk incessantly about nothing and no gains are made. Perhaps he knew that he would go rogue and so didn't want to be involved with the Ecumenical establishment.

Also, when he said that a Catholic will not be an orthodox or vice versa, this could just refer to the use of rites.

We need to be cautious when interpreting news articles and sound bytes.

Let's hope for the best...
Reply
#15
The lust (desire for the body) is not the only vice, so is the superbia (desire for power).

Originally the Eastern Catholics in the 17th Century united with Rome, because between the Catholic Austro-Hungarian Empire and the expanding Russian empire they decided that the Catholics will demand less and as a multicultural Empire will accept them as they are. They were able to keep their independence.

Now Bulgaria is between the Byzantine and the Russian patriarchates, and both wants to expand their power upon them. The Bulgarian patriarch apparently believes that they will have more independence uniting with Rome, than either under the Russians or under the Bizantine Orthodox group.

The Holy Spirit works. But the true and full understanding of the truth is not for humans, only those tempted by the Adversary believe that the know the good from the bad, and can make decisions as the defenders of the Truth. The rest of us is humble limited humans, moved by earthly reasons.

Reply
#16
Bulgaria very nearly converted to western-rite Christianity, under the Pope rather than the eastern rites under the Patriarch of Constantinople. I recall reading of the various proposals made by both sees, and Rome was generally much more conciliatory to the Khanate than the Greeks, who insisted very rigidly on ecclesiastical discipline and the firm subordination of any local hierarchy and clergy to the Patriarchate. Unfortunately, Byzantine military pressure won them over to the east.
Reply
#17
(10-23-2009, 05:56 PM)AlanF Wrote:
the article Wrote:Bishop Tichon said that "the theological dialogue that is going forward in these days in Cyprus is certainly important, but we should not be afraid to say that we must find as soon as possible the way to celebrate together."

"A Catholic will not become an Orthodox and vice versa, but we must approach the altar together," he added.

It sounds a bit like this bishop wants a practical "unity" without addressing the doctrine to me.

Or am I just being stupid?

You're not being stupid, but the bishop is not entirely off the mark, either.  "Orthodox" is a perectly good and Catholic word.  The Eastern Churches were "Orthodox" before the schism, and, as Fr. Adrian Fortescue pointed out over a hundred years ago, the Caholic Church does not want them to stop being Orthodox.  They have only to accept communion with Rome (including accepting the authority of the Pope as defined by Vatican I), and they're in.  Most of the (pitifully few) Russian Greek Catholic parishes define themselves as "Orthodox Catholic" or some such term.
Reply
#18
(10-25-2009, 08:42 AM)spasiisochrani Wrote:
(10-23-2009, 05:56 PM)AlanF Wrote:
the article Wrote:Bishop Tichon said that "the theological dialogue that is going forward in these days in Cyprus is certainly important, but we should not be afraid to say that we must find as soon as possible the way to celebrate together."

"A Catholic will not become an Orthodox and vice versa, but we must approach the altar together," he added.

It sounds a bit like this bishop wants a practical "unity" without addressing the doctrine to me.

Or am I just being stupid?

You're not being stupid, but the bishop is not entirely off the mark, either.  "Orthodox" is a perectly good and Catholic word.  The Eastern Churches were "Orthodox" before the schism, and, as Fr. Adrian Fortescue pointed out over a hundred years ago, the Caholic Church does not want them to stop being Orthodox.  They have only to accept communion with Rome (including accepting the authority of the Pope as defined by Vatican I), and they're in.  Most of the (pitifully few) Russian Greek Catholic parishes define themselves as "Orthodox Catholic" or some such term.

No one expects them to become Latin Rite Catholics, but we expect them to reject their heresies and accept all our dogmas if they are to come in to the true Church. This bishop appears to me to be using "Catholic" and "Orthodox" to mean separate theologies with different dogmas, like we have now. He says theological dialogue is important but "we should not be afraid to say that we must find as soon [i.e. before we can agree on theology] as possible the way to celebrate together."
Reply
#19
(10-24-2009, 05:13 PM)Cyriacus Wrote: Bulgaria very nearly converted to western-rite Christianity, under the Pope rather than the eastern rites under the Patriarch of Constantinople. I recall reading of the various proposals made by both sees, and Rome was generally much more conciliatory to the Khanate than the Greeks, who insisted very rigidly on ecclesiastical discipline and the firm subordination of any local hierarchy and clergy to the Patriarchate. Unfortunately, Byzantine military pressure won them over to the east.

Then obviously, it must have been God's will for Bulgaria to be Eastern rite and not Western.  It is not unfortunate that a particular country adopted the Byzantine rite as opposed to the Roman.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)