Patriarch of Constantinople: Catholic-Orthodox Re-Union now inevitable?
#41
(11-30-2019, 10:13 PM)PorphyriosK Wrote: Orthodoxy is not "returning to Catholicism".  Orthodoxy is Catholicism.

I know you don't believe it, and maybe we are wrong.  But this is a Catholic forum. The general understanding here is going to be that the church affiliated with Rome is the true Catholic Church.  By identifying as Orthodox, we know what you believe without you having to say it.  Saying Orthodoxy is the real Catholicism without any follow up is going to have the same effect here as if I were to go over to orthodoxchristianity.net and say the Catholic Church headed by the Pope of Rome is the True Holy Orthodoxy: a bunch of eye rolls and people more likely to think I'm being pretentious.
[-] The following 4 users Like Melkite's post:
  • antiquarian, Augustinian, jovan66102, XavierSem
Reply
#42
(12-01-2019, 04:22 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(11-30-2019, 10:13 PM)PorphyriosK Wrote: Orthodoxy is not "returning to Catholicism".  Orthodoxy is Catholicism.

I know you don't believe it, and maybe we are wrong.  But this is a Catholic forum. The general understanding here is going to be that the church affiliated with Rome is the true Catholic Church.  By identifying as Orthodox, we know what you believe without you having to say it.  Saying Orthodoxy is the real Catholicism without any follow up is going to have the same effect here as if I were to go over to orthodoxchristianity.net and say the Catholic Church headed by the Pope of Rome is the True Holy Orthodoxy: a bunch of eye rolls and people more likely to think I'm being pretentious.
I don’t think the meaning I intended in that statement is the meaning you took from it. It was not meant to be triumphal.  I just meant Orthodoxy isn’t NOT Catholicism.  It is.  I didn’t mean that Orthodoxy is Catholicism and the RC Church is not.  I believe the RC Church retains true Apostolic succession, priesthood, sacraments.  Rome hasn’t subtracted anything from the Catholic faith, but added to it.  All that is needed is to trim away the excess.  


I hold the RC Church and its prospects in much higher esteem than you may think.  In fact I believe the trimming away of some of that excess I just mentioned has already begun.  The RC faithful are awakening to the errors of Papal maximalism and ultramontanism and realizing their own important role in recognizing and preserving Tradition.  They are realizing that Tradition trumps papacy.  That is a big step toward Orthodoxy.
[-] The following 1 user Likes PorphyriosK's post:
  • antiquarian
Reply
#43
(12-01-2019, 01:19 PM)Florus Wrote:
(12-01-2019, 11:51 AM)formerbuddhist Wrote: But like Jay Dyer has correctly pointed out, there is a broad spectrum of RC thought and theology BUT the official teachings laid out in Trent, Vatican I and Denzinger's are almost exclusively of the Thomist/Counter Reformation variety.  It can certainly appear as if officially there's no room for anything else since Rome has pretty much dogmatized and thought in that style for so long.

 There was plenty of variety but it's ultimately irrelevant since the official dogmas of Rome are couched in scholastic counter reformation language with the assumptions of Thomism behind them. 

Personally I think Dyer is right that many of the Greek Fathers taught something like the Essence/Energies distinction and that one cannot read Thomist metaphysics back into the Fathers. I tend to think that Gregory Palamas was not necessarily coming up with something novel but taking up what was already taught in John of Damascus and Basil the Great at least in part 

 Like St. John of Damascus states in his "On the Orthodox Faith", our conception of God starts with the Father, not with an abstract, absolutely simple Essence whose distinctions are only virtual (i.e. not real).

Another thing I find particularly damning is that after Vatican II the theological milieu of official Catholicism seemingly changed again.  Thomism and the Counter Reformation were dropped, and a bizarre concoction of pseudo patristics wed to modernism was put in its place,  and yet the official teachings for centuries were couched in Thomist/Scholastic assumptions and metaphysics.  It's as if Rome no longer really knows what it believes or teaches at all.


I am a huge fan of a lot of the early Western saints, histories and practices (stuff from the pre Norman British isles,  Bede,Cuthbert,Guthlac,Brendan the Navigator,Benedict Biscop, Benedict of Nursia and his emphasis on the Office etc.) but it's not much of a living tradition anymore aside from in the hearts and minds of scattered eccentrics.

I'd argue that the attempt to exalt Thomism over every other form of thought was a recent phenomena that didn't have much staying power. 

I really can't comment on Gregory Palamas since I've never read him nor the relevant passages of Basil, but I am eager to learn. Any recommendations for reading?

I don't think anyone would disagree that our conception of God begins with the Father, but why can't we reason about his attributes? This is what both John of Damascus and Thomas do, and many of Thomas' arguments come straight from John's Exposition, he didn't think of himself an innovator.

I agree with your last point though, I think it's a sad reality. The modern worldview kills religion, our Western society is set up in a way that will destroy every ancient living tradition. We ourselves are victims of this since we have to really examine our practices and beliefs if we are to be Christians, in earlier times people just unconsciously did what society mandated, but these societies were built upon centuries of tradition and religion, now if you do the same you have nothing but soulless consumer culture.
The hard part is what you mentioned in the last paragraph.  Our current cultural paradigms (and let's not kid ourselves,  this "free market,  consumerist,  cosmopolitan" culture is everywhere, including once Orthodox regions)  is one of the deadliest enemies to any kind of restoration or even preservation of our Traditions.  The destruction of national, ethnic, linguistic and ancient liturgical Tradition is a deadly enemy, both in East and West. Us Orthodox cannot gloat either, as there has been much modernism within Orthodoxy for a long time and its growing, not to mention the various jurisdictional in fighting and schisms are shameful and embarrassing to say the least. 

As far as Palamas goes,  the 4th Book of the Philokalia has some of his stuff, and SUNY put out a great book  called "Dialogue Between an Orthodox and a Barlaamite" that is really good.  There's also an edition of the Triads you can read.  It's difficult stuff but they are good.  Basil's Letter 234 touches upon the Essence/Energies distinction, as does John of Damascus in his On the Orthodox Faith. I don't remember the exact part offhand, as I'm at an airport right now and not in front of my books. 

I don't personally dislike trads. I have a lot of love for the best of the Western Tradition, and unlike some Orthodox I don't think almost everything Western is bad. I still prefer Gregorian Chant to modern post Petrine Russian "high church opera" music,  and will always have a deep love of and respect for the traditional Benedictine and Pre Pius X Roman Breviary.
Walk before God in simplicity, and not in subtleties of the mind. Simplicity brings faith; but subtle and intricate speculations bring conceit; and conceit brings withdrawal from God. -Saint Isaac of Syria, Directions on Spiritual Training


"It is impossible in human terms to exaggerate the importance of being in a church or chapel before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. I very seldom repeat what I say. Let me repeat this sentence. It is impossible in human language to exaggerate the importance of being in a chapel or church before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. That sentence is the talisman of the highest sanctity. "Father John Hardon
[-] The following 1 user Likes formerbuddhist's post:
  • PorphyriosK
Reply
#44
(12-01-2019, 07:28 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: As far as Palamas goes,  the 4th Book of the Philokalia has some of his stuff, and SUNY put out a great book  called "Dialogue Between an Orthodox and a Barlaamite" that is really good.  There's also an edition of the Triads you can read.  It's difficult stuff but they are good.  Basil's Letter 234 touches upon the Essence/Energies distinction, as does John of Damascus in his On the Orthodox Faith. I don't remember the exact part offhand, as I'm at an airport right now and not in front of my books. 
.
"The energies are various, and the essence simple, but we say that we know our God from His energies, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence.  
His energies come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach."

-St. Basil the Great
[-] The following 1 user Likes PorphyriosK's post:
  • formerbuddhist
Reply
#45
(12-01-2019, 01:47 AM)Florus Wrote:
(11-30-2019, 11:12 PM)PorphyriosK Wrote: I never said it was a slam dunk or that they believed everything exactly as we do, but yes Orthodoxy and Catholicism do have very different concepts of Tradition and place different levels of emphasis on Patristics.  We emphasize the Fathers while you tend to emphasize Thomism, Trent & Counter-Reformation, Vatican I, and the Popes of the 19th-early 20th century.  Most Catholics view Patristics as more of a niche field of study for those who are inclined to it. 

Yeah fair. I was mainly using your point for broader observation, since I have seen so many Orthodox act as if just because our tradition isn't straight out of the great Greek fathers that it is inferior.

That is true about Catholicism of a certain tendency, but the reality is broader. I think of the Medieval commentators, the Renaissance Platonists, and Franciscan school scholastics. Catholic thought isn't limited to either Thomism or Patristics (and these two are not as sharply opposed as many think). I would say that your categorization of Catholic theology to be correct of you only look at the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
This is what really sucks about the broader community of armchair theologians and Catholic internet personalities. Everything is Thomism or bust, without much room for other valid Catholic positions. And I think this has much to do with the Thomist position being the easy entrance into Catholic theology due to the structure of the Summa.

My own theological views have begun to lean more toward the Franciscan/Patristic end of things, with some more emphasis on Platonism. This doesn't mean I reject Thomism, I agree with all the key points, but get a better understanding of theology out of the Fathers and Franciscans than I do with Thomism. Plus, I think a heavy, hair-splitting Aristotelian emphasis is what got us into the whole mess with nominalism.
"The Heart of Jesus is closer to you when you suffer, than when you are full of joy." - St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

"In my bed by night I sought him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, and found him not. I will rise, and will go about the city: in the streets and the broad ways I will seek him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, and I found him not.The watchmen who keep the city, found me: Have you seen him, whom my soul loveth? When I had a little passed by them, I found him whom my soul loveth: I held him: and I will not let him go, till I bring him into my mother’s house, and into the chamber of her that bore me." - Cant. 3:1-4
Reply
#46
(12-01-2019, 07:28 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: The hard part is what you mentioned in the last paragraph.  Our current cultural paradigms (and let's not kid ourselves,  this "free market,  consumerist,  cosmopolitan" culture is everywhere, including once Orthodox regions)  is one of the deadliest enemies to any kind of restoration or even preservation of our Traditions.  The destruction of national, ethnic, linguistic and ancient liturgical Tradition is a deadly enemy, both in East and West. Us Orthodox cannot gloat either, as there has been much modernism within Orthodoxy for a long time and its growing, not to mention the various jurisdictional in fighting and schisms are shameful and embarrassing to say the least. 

As far as Palamas goes,  the 4th Book of the Philokalia has some of his stuff, and SUNY put out a great book  called "Dialogue Between an Orthodox and a Barlaamite" that is really good.  There's also an edition of the Triads you can read.  It's difficult stuff but they are good.  Basil's Letter 234 touches upon the Essence/Energies distinction, as does John of Damascus in his On the Orthodox Faith. I don't remember the exact part offhand, as I'm at an airport right now and not in front of my books. 

I don't personally dislike trads. I have a lot of love for the best of the Western Tradition, and unlike some Orthodox I don't think almost everything Western is bad. I still prefer Gregorian Chant to modern post Petrine Russian "high church opera" music,  and will always have a deep love of and respect for the traditional Benedictine and Pre Pius X Roman Breviary.

Thanks man. We really are an uprooted people, and I have respect for anyone's attempt to regain something of the way of life that has been lost to modernity.
"If your heart comes to feel a natural hatred for sin, it has defeated the causes of sin and freed itself from them. Keep hell’s torments in mind; but know that your Helper is at hand. Do nothing that will grieve Him, but say to Him with tears: ‘Be merciful and deliver me, O Lord, for without Thy help I cannot escape from the hands of my enemies.’ Be attentive to your heart, and He will guard you from all evil."

- St. Isaias the Solitary

"Constant action overcomes cold; being still overcomes heat. Purity
and stillness give the correct law to all under heaven."

- Tao Te Ching 45
[-] The following 1 user Likes Florus's post:
  • formerbuddhist
Reply
#47
There has been some theological progress in recent times to recognize that "from the Father and the Son" (the Latin Fathers' preferred way of expressing the dogma) and "from the Father through the Son (the mode of expression preferred by the Greek Fathers) ultimately acknowledge the same mystery together. I wrote an article on the subject a few months ago: https://onepeterfive.com/filioque-separated-east/

"The solution adopted by Greek and Latin bishops and theologians from a few decades ago was this:
Quote:The Father only generates the Son by breathing (proballein in Greek) through him the Holy Spirit and the Son is only begotten by the Father insofar as the spiration (probolh in Greek) passes through him. The Father is Father of the One Son only by being for him and through him the origin of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit does not precede the Son, since the Son characterizes as Father the Father from whom the Spirit takes his origin, according to the Trinitarian order. But the spiration of the Spirit from the Father takes place by and through (the two senses of dia in Greek) the generation of the Son, to which it gives its Trinitarian character.
And thus, the solution to both the dogmatic and disciplinary difficulties should be clear. The only question now is whether the will to reunite is present or not."

The text from theologians that was being cited is also online here: https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library...pirit-2349

We welcome our Orthodox Brethren to come to Council with the Catholic Church, as was done at Lyons II and at Florence, and hopefully, this time, by the Grace of God, by the Prayers of the Immaculate Virgin Mother of God, and of the Faithful, full corporate re-union will be the result. If only the Pope and the Bishops would do what Heaven Commanded at Fatima, the Victory would come soon.
TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with your most precious Blood and your sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby offer my whole life to the intention of your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Together with my life, I place at your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the sufferings of my entire life for ... https://marianapostolate.com/life-offering/
Reply
#48
Another article confirming the news from OrthoChristian: 

All who love Christendom and the common cause of Christ's Kingdom in this world, it's expansion, growth, sustenance and ultimate triumph over all errors, schisms and divisions, will rejoice on hearing that the Greek Orthodox Church will soon re-unite with the Holy Catholic Church. This is nearly a 1000 years overdue, and now some of us in our generation can live to see it happen! Patriarch Bartholomew says Catholic-Orthodox Re-Union is inevitable. Do you agree with him?

From: https://orthochristian.com/125924.html

[Image: 327809.p.jpg?mtime=1571747853]

"On November 12, Patriarch Bartholomew participated in the Vespers service at the Catholic Abbey of Our Lady of St. Rémy in Rochefort, Belgium, together with Archimandrite Alexios, the abbot of Xenophontos Monastery, and Hieromonk Theophilos of Pantocrator Monastery, both on Mt. Athos.

According to a new report from the Union of Orthodox Journalists, during his trip to Mt. Athos the previous month, Pat. Bartholomew attempted to convince several Athonite abbots and monks that there are no dogmatic differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, and that reunion with the Catholic church is inevitable.

Pat. Bartholomew expressed his personal convictions during a private talk at Pantocrator Monastery with the brethren and guests of the monastery, including other Athonite abbots. Eyewitnesses report that Pat. Bartholomew’s security did not allow anyone to record the conversation.

In his opinion, the division that now exists between Orthodoxy and Catholicism is merely a matter of historical events, not dogmatic differences.

Catholics “are just as Christian as we are,” Pat. Bartholomew emphasized, adding that the recent gift of the relics of St. Peter from Pope Francis is proof of the Catholic church’s nearness to Orthodoxy.

According to the UOJ’s sources, Pantocrator abbot Archimandrite Gabriel, Xenophontos abbot Archimandrite Alexios, Vatopedia abbot Archimandrite Ephraim, the brethren of several monasteries, and other guests were all present for the talk.

Most of the brethren were at a loss, hearing Pat. Bartholomew’s ecumenistic arguments, though none present objected. Some of those present reportedly began to weep when Pat. Bartholomew said that reunion with the Catholic church is inevitable.

Recall that Xenophontos and Pantocrator Monasteries have been the most receptive to the Ukrainian schismatics. Abbot Alexios of Xenophontos concelebrated in the enthronement of Epiphany Dumenko as primate of the OCU, and Pantocrator was the first monastery where schismatics served Liturgy on Mt. Athos.

At a recent meeting in Constantinople with representatives of Tbilisi University, Pat. Bartholomew said that dialogue with other Christians, especially Catholics, is one of the priorities of the Patriarchate of Constantinople."

[b]1911 Catholic Encyclopedia, Re-Union of Christendom:[/b] "In the present age the divisions of Christendom not only furnish its assailants with their most effective taunt, but constitute the most serious hindrance in the way of Christian work. Hence, among those who have inherited the condition of separation, the value of Christian unity has come to be much more deeply appreciated than ever before, and many active movements have been set on foot, and schemes devised, for its restoration ... Why, if our Eastern brethren appreciate the importance of unity, have they not during all these centuries taken the initiative in working for the holding of such a general council and invited the Catholic representatives to take a friendly part in it? Why, when the popes have taken that initiative and have invited the Easterns in the most cordial terms to join in such a council, or at least to join with them in some friendly conference to discuss the possibilities of a reconciliation, have they always so sternly refused? There are those who think that, as in the times of Photius and Cærularius, the chief deterring causes that stand in the way of the reunion of the Orthodox with the Catholics are political ... since the time of the Council of Florence it has been a fixed principle of papal government that Orientals passing into communion with the Holy See should be required to remain in their own rites and customs where no doctrinal error was involved, Leo XXII enforcing adherence to this principle by new sanctions in his "Orientalium ecclesiarum dignitas" (1893). Moreover, why should the popes or their adherents in the West cherish dislike for rites and customs so intimately associated with the memories of those venerable Fathers and doctors whom East and West agree in venerating and claiming as their own? Could the Easterns, then, only be induced to lay aside these suspicions, if but provisionally, and meet the pope or his representatives in friendly conference, the problem of reunion would already be half solved ... Is such a consummation impossible? For the present [1911] it would seem to be so, if we are to judge by the attitude of the rulers, civil and ecclesiastical, of the Orthodox Churches ... It is perhaps the spectacle which can now be seen in many places in the East, of Catholics of the Greek and Latin Rite working side by side in cordial co-operation, while on terms of friendly intercourse with the Orthodox of the same neighbourhood, which is chiefly helpful in removing prejudice by the object lesson it offers of what reunion would bring to pass in all parts of the world in these days, when Easterns as well as Westerns are spreading and mingling in many lands." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15132a.htm

[b]1911 Catholic Encyclopedia, Eastern Schism, by Fr. Fortescue:[/b] "That is the right attitude towards the Orthodox always. They have a horror of being latinized, of betraying the old Faith. One must always insist that there is no idea of latinizing them, that the old Faith is not incompatible with, but rather demands union with the chief see which their Fathers obeyed. In canon law they have nothing to change except such abuses as the sale of bishoprics and the Erastianism that their own better theologians deplore. Celibacy, azyme bread, and so on are Latin customs that no one thinks of forcing on them. They need not add the Filioque to the Creed; they will always keep their venerable rite untouched. Not a bishop need be moved, hardly a feast (except that of St. Photius on 6 Feb.) altered. All that is asked of them is to come back to where their Fathers stood, to treat Rome as Athanasius, Basil, Chrysostom treated her. It is not Latins, it is they who have left the Faith of their Fathers. There is no humiliation in retracing one's steps when one has wandered down a mistaken road because of long-forgotten personal quarrels. They too must see how disastrous to the common cause is the scandal of the division. They too must wish to put an end to so crying an evil. And if they really wish it the way need not be difficult. For, indeed, after nine centuries of schism we may realize on both sides that it is not only the greatest it is also the most superfluous evil in Christendom." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13535a.htm
TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING: My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with your most precious Blood and your sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby offer my whole life to the intention of your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Together with my life, I place at your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the sufferings of my entire life for ... https://marianapostolate.com/life-offering/
[-] The following 2 users Like XavierSem's post:
  • antiquarian, Augustinian
Reply
#49
Good. Only a united Christendom can fight modernity. It makes no sense to have a schism over matters of historical events when we believe the same things.

Clinging to some event that happened 7-800 years ago is against forgiveness and reeks of pride.
"The Heart of Jesus is closer to you when you suffer, than when you are full of joy." - St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

"In my bed by night I sought him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, and found him not. I will rise, and will go about the city: in the streets and the broad ways I will seek him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, and I found him not.The watchmen who keep the city, found me: Have you seen him, whom my soul loveth? When I had a little passed by them, I found him whom my soul loveth: I held him: and I will not let him go, till I bring him into my mother’s house, and into the chamber of her that bore me." - Cant. 3:1-4
[-] The following 3 users Like Augustinian's post:
  • antiquarian, Melkite, XavierSem
Reply
#50
(01-21-2020, 10:21 AM)Augustinian Wrote: Good. Only a united Christendom can fight modernity. It makes no sense to have a schism over matters of historical events when we believe the same things.

Clinging to some event that happened 7-800 years ago is against forgiveness and reeks of pride.

If EO unites with a Francis Papacy, I'm gonna laugh at all those EO refugees who fled to escape Bergoligio. :D

I will also laugh at Jay Dyer as he will be forced to leave the EO for Kaballahism, or maybe going back to sedevacantism.
[-] The following 2 users Like austenbosten's post:
  • Augustinian, Melkite
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)