Showing posts with label Orthodox Christianity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Orthodox Christianity. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 08, 2013

Orthodoxy and Catholicism

The Young Fogey has been putting up a series of posts on the Orthodox vs Catholicism debate. Some of them are quite interesting. You may have to scroll down on his blog to catch the earlier ones. I meant to bump this earlier but Holy Week was not the time for that kind of discussion.

Wednesday, September 05, 2012

Should a Catholic Read Eastern Orthodox Writings?

Should a Catholic read Eastern Orthodox writings?  In my humble opinion, that really depends. 
Read the rest here.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Orthodox churches find it difficult to overcome differences

Moscow (ENInews). Diptychs, an arcane liturgical term that describes the order in which Orthodox churches commemorate each other at their services, is one of the tangled issues blocking plans for what could be the first great church council in 1,200 years.

Some Orthodox leaders say the churches need to get together to discuss common issues and speak with one voice on such important topics as bioethics, sexuality and the environment, but differences over arcane church issues such as diptychs and autocephaly (the independent status of Orthodox churches) run deep.

There are about 250 million Orthodox Christians in the world, belonging to 14 or 15 independent Orthodox churches, depending on which church is counting. The Patriarchate of Constantinople, for example, does not recognize the autocephaly (independence) granted by Moscow to the Orthodox Church in America (OCA) in 1970, and does not commemorate the OCA in its diptychs.

Diptychs are not a question of dogma, but they are at the heart of church protocol. A leader of the Georgian Orthodox Church cited its founding in the fifth century in explaining why his church won't back down in its demands for greater recognition.
Read the rest here.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Another great story about Troy Polamalu

The most famous Orthodox Christian in Pittsburgh, if not the nation, has a greeting for his fellow believers today:

"Kala Christougena!" said Steelers safety Troy Polamalu. That's Greek for "Merry Christmas!"

Mr. Polamalu and his wife, Theodora, actually celebrated Christmas 13 days ago, but they keep the same Orthodox traditions as those who observe today. Most Orthodox celebrate on Dec. 25, but many Slavic churches tie liturgy to the old Julian calendar, which is 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar. The Greek Orthodox Church and some others have adopted the Gregorian calendar -- except at Easter.

"We all celebrate Easter on the same day," said Mr. Polamalu, 29. Orthodoxy is the Eastern wing of the earliest Christian church, which split into the Orthodox and Catholic churches in 1054.

He and Theodora converted to Orthodoxy about five years ago. His background was Catholic and Protestant, hers Muslim and Protestant. They were Christians in search of a deeper, more consistent experience of God.

"Orthodoxy is like an abyss of beauty that's just endless," he said. "I have read the Bible many times. But after fasting, and being baptized Orthodox, it's like reading a whole new Bible. You see the depth behind the words so much more clearly."
Read the rest here.

Monday, December 06, 2010

Fr. Andrew Phillips: Why Few Disillusioned Anglicans Will Join Orthodoxy

Reposted with permission from Journey to Orthodoxy.
Currently the Church of England is racked by division concerning the ordination of homosexual clergy and female bishops. There are now Anglicans who have already left or who are planning to leave the Church of England because they cannot square such ‘modernisation' with their consciences. Some speak of ‘the end of the Church of England'. Most who leave seem to join other Protestant groups or else go to Roman Catholicism. A third option is to start a new, or else join an old, ‘Continuing Anglican Church', of which there are several. A fourth option, the least likely, is to join one of the Orthodox Churches. Why is this fourth option by far the least popular? There are several reasons:

1.Motivation

We must wonder about the motivations of those who object to ‘woman bishops'. The doctrine of the Church of England was largely moulded by a woman, Queen Elizabeth I, and the current head of the Church of England is her namesake, Queen Elizabeth II. The wider Anglican Communion has had ‘woman-bishops' for years. And what logic is there in the concept that you can have ‘woman-priests', but not woman-bishops? This is like saying that you can have woman-teachers, but not woman-headteachers. You cannot help suspecting a certain misogyny and clericalism in the opposition to ‘woman-priests' in what is, after all, a Protestant, that is, non-sacramental, denomination. The reason why female clergy are unthinkable in the Orthodox Church is not because of misogyny, but because Christ-God did not appoint women as apostles. If Anglicans were going to leave the Church of England about female clergy, they should have left when female clergy were first introduced. However, if they wished to join the Orthodox Church because of this issue, then they needed a positive reason to join it, not a negative reason to leave somewhere else.

Again, there is much lack of logic with the question of homosexual clergy. They have existed for generations in the Church of England and relatively openly. A small section of senior clergy of the C of E long ago gained notoriety for sodomy and pedophilia in public schools. As one member of the C of E said to me a few years ago: ‘I can't see anything wrong with it, as long as they are discreet'. In other words, everything is fine as long as you are hypocritical. Orthodox look for honesty, logic and consistency in the motivation of those who say that they wish to join the Orthodox Church. How otherwise will former Anglicans reach the next stage, when, having formally joined the Church, they actually have to become Orthodox, which can be a very different story.

2.The Tradition, the Liturgy and the Sense of the Sacred

Few Anglicans will join the Orthodox Church because our liturgical heritage is so radically different – the Orthodox Church is nearly 2,000 years old, the Church of England not yet 500 years old. Therefore, in the latter, standing up and singing Victorian or modern songs together and sitting down and listening to long speeches about current events (sermons) is very important. In the Orthodox Church we come to church to pray, following rites which have scarcely changed since apostolic times, as for example is witnessed to by baptism by immersion, confirmation given with baptism, communion in both kinds, communion given to babies, confession, our frequent use of the sign of the cross (and in its original form), the use of candles, incense, a screen, a veil over the altar doors and a seven-branched candlestick. For the same reason of apostolicity, we stand for worship, both our creed and calendar, confirmed in the fourth century, are zealously adhered to and we do not use the novelty of organs or other musical instruments.

Orthodox worship therefore comes as a culture shock to those who come from forms of worship which date back only few generations or at best, a few centuries. Moreover, Anglican worship, when not wholly moulded by modern secularism, is defined by its revolt against Roman Catholicism. And the latter, despite many abuses and deformations, is actually older than that of the Church of England and still has some liturgical sense - though at present its sense of the sacred, of holiness, is often utterly deficient. To be honest, it is clear that Anglicans have simply lost the sense of the Tradition (the inspirations of the Holy Spirit over nearly 2,000 years) and therefore they only have recent human conventions and customs to mould their worship. And in losing the Tradition, Anglicans have also lost the sacraments and sacramental sense. This can be the only explanation for their introduction of female clergy, who, in their case, are social workers – and some of them surely very good social workers - but not priests.

3.The Ascetic Sense

The Orthodox Church is the only original Church, therefore it is an ascetic Church, as it was in the times of St John the Baptist, of the apostles in Jerusalem, as it was in the catacombs, as it was in the deserts of Egypt, as it still is today. Our guardians are in monasticism, which has nothing to do with the secular criteria of the Church of England. The fact that we stand for worship is for example an almost impossible barrier for most Anglicans. The fact that we are called on to fast for half the year is another impossible barrier for most. For example, our whole ethos of preparation for communion, fasting, reading of prayers and confession, is alien to a group in which people are used to having a fried breakfast and then an hour or so later taking communion. It is clear to Orthodox (as also to many Anglicans) that our understanding of communion is totally different. For them it is a mere memorial with bread and wine, for us it is the burning presence of the Body and Blood of Christ.

Prayer, fasting, standing, confession – all these practices are alien to the Church of England and yet essential to the Gospel and therefore to Orthodoxy. Lifelong Orthodox actually believe in the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation and Divinity of Christ, the Resurrection, the Ever-Virginity of the Mother of God, the Cross, Providence, holiness (the Holy Spirit acting in the material world), the saints, the angels, relics, icons and miracles. Anglicans have produced no saints over nearly 500 years (though a very few do speak of St Charles I) and most of them tell me that they are proud of this and that they do not believe in saints. True, we Orthodox are not always very devout in our Orthodoxy and not very punctual at our services, but we would not think of abolishing any of the beliefs of the Church or the practices of prayer, fasting, standing and confession. The Church is the Church, regardless of our human weaknesses. We do not adapt the Church to the world (secularism), as Henry VIII did and as Archbishop Rowan Williams is in fact allowing through weakness. In Orthodoxy, the world adapts to the Church, not the other way round.

4.Becoming Orthodox

Some former Anglicans have in the past joined the Orthodox Church. Many have integrated the Faith and, after joining, have actually become Orthodox. Others, sad to say, having joined the Orthodox Church for negative reasons (disillusionment with the C of E) or for purely academic reasons and not for positive reasons (the realisation that without Orthodoxy their souls will die), and so not become Orthodox. As a result they have tended to split off from the mainstream, closing themselves off in little groups, where they practise what is in fact an approximate if very confused Orthodox rite with Anglican practices, a ‘make it up as you go along' attitude. This means intercommunion, no confession, no fasting, sitting down during the services (indeed, virtually no services beyond the eucharistic liturgy), the use of Anglican hymns, the use of the Anglican calendar, no iconostasis, parish politics, and ‘protesting' (= Protestant) attitudes towards Orthodox bishops and resulting divisions and boycotts of their respective cathedrals and bishops.

Another problem here is the refusal by many ex-Anglicans to accept that Orthodoxy is international. Unfortunately, Anglicans who are used to ‘uninational' parishes find it very difficult to accept the multinational parishes, which are the reality of real Orthodoxy. Without the presence of other Orthodox nationalities, they will not learn Orthodoxy, they will not actually become Orthodox. The presence of ‘foreigners' among them should be greeted by them and they should accommodate them, accepting parts of the service in ‘foreign' languages (xenophobes must realise that every ‘foreign' language is someone else's native language). The nationalist exclusivity of many ex-Anglicans, to be frank, their phyletism or nationalism, and refusal to come to terms with the sometimes very, very dark national history of England/Britain, is not acceptable in the multinational Orthodox world. In our parish we have eighteen nationalities, from Russian to Greek, Romanian to Syrian, Australian to Latvian, French to Bulgarian – this is reality. History shows us that tiny ex-Anglican groups, unintegrated into the mainstream of the Orthodox Church, are basically just more ‘Continuing Anglican Churches' and are not taken seriously by the rest of the Orthodox Church.

Conclusion

The chances are that most Anglicans will remain in the Church of England, though some will leave for Roman Catholicism and some for various sub-Anglican groups, perhaps headed by ‘African Anglicans'. It is not to be expected that many will wish to join the Orthodox Church – for the four reasons expressed above. Of course, all are welcome to come and see, as is everyone, whatever their background in this country, whether they belong to the 2% who are practising Anglicans or the 98% who are not. Some, as we know, not only do join our Church, but also find their spiritual home with us and in due course become Orthodox. If you can accept us, as we are, welcome! But please do not come with your own agenda or else you will also be disillusioned.

Fr. Andrew Phillips
St Edith of Wilton
16/29 September 2010


The above raises some interesting points which I think are fair, if perhaps expressed a bit triumphantly. I would and do take exception to the suggestion that Anglicans are unfamiliar with prayer. That strikes me as rather uncharitable hyperbole. In my mind the principal barriers that Anglicans have with respect to Orthodoxy are two.

1. Ignorance. Most Anglicans have had little or no contact with the Orthodox Church. In many places there are no Orthodox churches for many miles. The vast majority of Anglicans don't think about us because we are invisible. And as the old saying goes... "out of sight, out of mind."

2. Culture shock. Anglicanism is a distinctly Western form of Christianity with roots in the Roman Church, but having drifted more and more towards overt Protestantism over the centuries. That drift has accelerated in recent decades. Orthodoxy is a profoundly liturgical Faith with its roots lying in the Roman Empire of the East. We are in a word, Byzantine. Our rites are about as alien to most Anglicans as one can get. Overcoming that is extremely difficult for many Western Christians.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

60 Minutes to broadcast segment on the Orthodox Church

The CBS news program "60 Minutes" will air a segment on the Orthodox Church this Sunday Dec 20th (check local schedules for broadcast times). His All Holiness Bartholomew Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and New Rome is interviewed in the segment.

Source

Sunday, August 09, 2009

A very good post on the Orthodox Church by a Roman Catholic.

Roman Catholic blogger Teófilo de Jesús writes...
Orthodox Christians consider the differences between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches as both substantial and substantive, and resent when Catholics trivialize them. Though they recognize that both communions share a common “Tradition” or Deposit of Faith, they will point out that the Roman Catholic Church has been more inconsistently faithful – or more consistently unfaithful – to Tradition than the Orthodox Church has been in 2000 years of Christian history. Generally, all Orthodox Christians would agree, with various nuances, with the following 12 differences between their Church and the Catholic Church. I want to limit them to 12 because of its symbolic character and also because it is convenient and brief:
Read his list here.

As far as the list goes there is not much that is a source for heartburn. I could add to it and I would have given different emphasis to various topics. And yes, I think there are a few points where some amplification would not be out of order. But in the end I think this is a reasonably accurate and remarkably irenic post.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Some general advice to inquirers and those contemplating Holy Orthodoxy

I have been getting more than a few comments and private emails lately from people who are considering conversion to the Orthodox Church. Some have asked for advice and counsel. Let me begin by saying to those who have indicated they are entering or at least thinking about entering the Orthodox Church, welcome. It took me roughly a quarter century from my first visit to an Orthodox service to make the move. So, most of you are already ahead of me. Secondly let me say thank you. I am flattered (and a little surprised) that apparently some people actually read my blog and take my often eclectic ramblings seriously.

Ronald Reagan once said that leaving the Democratic Party for the Republican was the hardest thing he ever did. He compared it to changing religions. My politics have evolved over time but I have never had a "Road to Damascus" moment that impelled me to a really major political sea change. So I can't comment on how hard that is. But if Reagan meant that changing religions is hard, he won't get an argument from me.

It really is not easy, especially if you are coming into the Church at least in part because of a painful situation in your current/former spiritual home. Family considerations can be tough too. Even if you are single or your spouse has no objections to your conversion, changing religions creates baggage. You will forever be explaining to extended family and those friends who will know of your move why the Episcopal Church (or fill in your former church) was not good enough for you.

But then there is the compensation. And that is in the form of the peace that comes only from knowing that you are in God’s Church working out your salvation “in trembling and fear” with other Orthodox Christians. That sense of peace is priceless. It doesn’t mean there won’t be rough patches. I promise you there will be. It doesn’t mean the Orthodox Church doesn’t suffer from all of the problems that come with any organization composed of human beings. It does. You need only do a quick online search to find references to the recent troubles in the Orthodox Church in America or the current controversies in the Antiochian Archdiocese for evidence. Orthodox Christians, whether layman or clergy or even bishops suffer from all the temptations of the world just like Methodists, Roman Catholics, and everyone else. And sometimes we fail. (I could write books on that subject without ever making references to third parties.)

A friend of mine once told me the story of a monk at St. Anthony’s monastery in Arizona who was asked by a visitor what they (the monks) did all day. The monk replied “we fall down and get back up again.” That in a nutshell is Orthodox Christianity. To borrow a line from a source I have long forgotten, “after years of desperate searching, I finally found the perfect church. And then I ruined it by joining.”

So what about the advice I mentioned in the title? It’s coming. First though we must have the inevitable disclaimers. I am not a priest, monk or anyone whose opinions should be taken as being of more importance than anyone else’s. If someone else gives you conflicting advice there is at least an even chance that you should pay more attention to them than me. And if they are wearing a cassock those odds rise to near 100%.

Ok with the disclaimers out of the way here is John’s generic advice, which along with $5.00 will get you a very small cup of coffee at Starbucks.

I strongly encourage inquirers and those more firmly on the path to Orthodoxy to look at some of the material and websites I have linked in the sidebar of Ad Orientem. You will find a lot of stuff there. Perhaps one of the best things you can do (besides praying and fasting) is to join the Orthodox Inquirers and Converts online discussion group. That's also linked in the sidebar. You will be able to talk to people from all kinds of backgrounds who are also converts or inquirers. Some have been in the Church for many years. Others are still new or just asking questions. The group has many clergy who are there to help and answer questions. Also the forum is moderated by clergy so things don’t get out of hand if someone starts throwing out really bad advice or making statements that aren’t quite on the mark.

Remember also that the Church has been around for 2000 years. Whatever questions, problems or concerns you have, I promise you that you are not the first one with those issues. The discussion group is I think one of the best places for an inquirer to go for information besides their priest. That said don't get wrapped up in too many details.

Not long ago someone commented on another thread that they were always worrying about whether or not they were doing things "right." Were they correct in their understanding of church canons and rules? It is really easy to start getting focused on things like what is and is not OK on a given fast day, or how many times should I make the sign of the cross when entering a church or when should I be making full prostrations. Some people also worry about which councils forbid fourth marriages or what council condemned Calvinism.

STOP!

I am not saying that any of that is unimportant. But I am going to say most of that is not critical to our salvation. God is not worried about whether you bow and make the sign of the cross three times when you walk into a church or can rattle off church canons from memory. He is worrying about the other things, most of which are covered in the Ten Commandments. Your priest / spiritual father will guide you on your path into the Church and make sure you get the need to know information. So don’t sweat the details until you have the basics down first. Speaking of which, what are the basics?

This is IMHO what we really need to know and be doing… the basics. First the “know this” part…

1. We need to know how to make the sign of cross correctly.

2. We need to know the Creed and be able to recite it from memory.

3. We need to know the Lord’s Prayer and the Jesus Prayer.

4. We need to have a basic familiarity with church teachings and doctrine of which most of the essentials can be found in Fr. Thomas Hopko’s work on The Orthodox Faith. There are other sources as well, but that one is convenient and you don't need a PHD to read it.

Now for the need “to be doing” part…

1. First you need to find an Orthodox parish church and start attending services. If you are blessed to have more than one Orthodox parish within a reasonable distance from where you live, visit all of them. I encourage you to look for parishes where services are mainly or entirely in English. This is increasingly the norm here in North America but there are still some very ethnic parishes where services are in old country languages. There is nothing wrong with liturgy in Greek, Arabic or Slavonic. But much of the Orthodox Faith is found in our liturgy. It has often been said that the Orthodox Liturgy is one of our great catechetical tools because almost every sentence, gesture and even individual words are packed with theological meaning. Some of you however may be limited in your choices. You go where you must. I know of many people who converted into Orthodoxy through parishes where the services are still mostly not in English and one can find great beauty in the Divine Liturgy served in some of the ancient liturgical tongues of the Church, just as many Roman Catholics often find great spiritual inspiration from Mass in Latin. Once you find a parish be sure to introduce yourself to the priest and let him know you are considering converting. He will take it from there.

2. Pray. We need to pray everyday, ideally at least three times a day. If you don’t have an Orthodox Prayer Book, buy one. I recommend the Jordanville Prayer Book, but any one that your spiritual father blesses is a good choice.

3. Fast to the best of your ability under the guidance of your spiritual father. This latter part is very important. It is extremely common to try taking on too much fasting fresh out of the gate. The result is that you fall and get discouraged. Always remember that fasting is not an exercise in how well we can meet some 5th century dietary restrictions. It is spiritual medicine designed to stretch and discipline the body. If you discover that keeping the fasts strictly (especially during Lent) is really tough, don’t worry. You are not alone. Talk to your spiritual father and ask his advice. Often priests will bless a relaxation of the fast for those who struggle with it.

4. Don’t dive into theology. Read the lives of the saints.

5. Do visit an Orthodox monastery. But don’t move in. Monasteries are one of the great treasures of the Orthodox Church. If the Church is a spiritual hospital then monasteries are often our intensive care ward. Some people have a calling to the angelic life. But inquirers and recent converts need to be cautious about becoming convinced in the fresh enthusiasm for their new faith, that they are called to be monks or nuns. Most monasteries wisely will not take recent converts as novices. But by all means visit a monastery for a few days.

6. Once you are received into the Church take confession frequently and Holy Communion as often as your spiritual father will bless you to do so. As Metropolitan +Jonah recently said “you can not lead a spiritual life without frequent confession.”

7. This next point falls under the heading of “do as I say and not as I do.” Avoid (online) disputations and arguments. I am soooo guilty of this. So trust me when I say that these are very rarely spiritually healthy. That doesn’t mean you should not share your faith with others. It doesn’t even mean you should not discuss it with people who might not agree with you. But when you sense a “conversation” turning into a debate or an argument, that is usually a good time to bow out. I have never once met anyone converted into Orthodoxy by calling them a heretic. That’s not saying that there is no such thing as heresy or that there aren’t heretics. But judgmentalism and triumphalism are spiritually dangerous. Yes, we sometimes need to make prudential judgments. Many converts have found Orthodoxy in part because they concluded that their former spiritual home had gone off the tracks. But care needs to be taken before judging or correcting others. St. Maximus the Confessor once said that those who busy themselves with the sins of others have not yet begun to see their own. I have frequently been guilty of this. May God forgive me.

Have you noticed something? The “do this” list is a lot longer than the “know this” list. That’s because Orthodoxy is not a collection of canons or decrees from OEcumenical Councils. It is quite literally right belief and right worship of God. Orthodoxy is inherently experiential. You can’t become Orthodox from reading books. You become Orthodox from praying and living an Orthodox life. And that is really what everything I have written boils down to.

Please feel free to drop me a line with questions, comments or even criticism either in the combox or by email. My contact info is in the link in the sidebar.

Addendum:
See Orrologion's post of a similar theme. I strongly concur with his witty (and pointed) observations.

A Pilgrims Way

Monday, June 08, 2009

Some food for thought...

From Mike Liccione who updates his blog far too infrequently...
As as another Tiber-swimmer, Fr. Al Kimel, once wrote: "A church which does not claim to be the Church, outside of which there is no salvation, is not the Church founded by Jesus Christ." The Anglican Communion has, historically, understood itself to be at most a "branch" of the Church; but for Fr. Jeffrey and many others, the recent history of that communion calls even that claim into question. A church which recognizes no doctrinal authority other than a "consensus" identifiable by scholarship and subject to reversal by allegedly new things done by the Spirit cannot reliably transmit the "faith once given" to the saints—nor, indeed, eternal life. It cannot present divine revelation as anything more than a set of data about which various opinions can be entertained and should be tolerated. Such a church is not an authoritative vessel and teacher of truth, the Mystical Body of Christ which shares in his authority as her Head.
Read the whole thing here. Mike and I would disagree on where The Church lies. But here are words which express a very Orthodox understanding of the word "catholic" and what it implies. There are no multiple Churches and multiple Truths. There are no "branches." There is The Church, and there is that which lies outside it. Of course not all sects are created equal. There are varying degrees of error. But the Ark of Salvation and the true and grace filled Mysteries can only be found within the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church affirmed in the Symbol of Faith.

This is something which I think we have become a bit timid about pointing out to those outside of it. In all honesty I am guilty of this myself. No one wants to offend others and I seriously doubt many converts have been won by insulting people. But there is a fine line between being sensitive to causing unnecessary hurt or offense and fudging the truth because it might make people uncomfortable. Sometimes I think we shy away from saying things like this not because we are afraid we might hurt someone's feeling but more because we are afraid what others will think of us.

Saturday, February 28, 2009

"All bishops are Auxiliary bishops..." ???

From the recent single issue meeting of the Holy Synod of Antioch...

THE DECISION REGARDING THE AMENDING OF ARTICLES CONCERNING BISHOPS ACCORDING TO THE BY-LAWS OF HE PATRIARCHATE

CHAPTER VI, THE BISHOPS

Article 75: The Patriarch is the reference point of all bishops in Damascus, Patriarchal Monasteries and Vicariates; and they are under his authority[.]

Article 76: The Metropolitan is the point of reference of all bishops in his Archdiocese and they are under his authority.

Article 77: All bishops within the Antiochian See are auxiliary bishops and are directly under their spiritual authority.

Article 78: The Metropolitan defines the responsibilities of the bishops and the place where they should serve. The bishop does not do anything contrary to the will of the Metropolitan.

Article 79: The aforementioned articles 75, 76, 77 and 78 are applicable in all Antiochian Archdioceses and whatever contradicts these articles is null and void.

Issued by the Holy Synod of Antioch, Damascus, February 24, 2009

Signed by:

His Beatitude, IGNATIUS IV, Patriarch

His Eminence, ILYAS, Tripoli

His Eminence, ELIA, Hama

His Eminence, ELIAS, Tyre and Sidon

His Eminence, GEORGE, Homs

His Eminence, PAUL, Australia

His Eminence, DAMASKINOS, Brazil

His Eminence, ESPER, Houran

His Eminence, BASILIOS, Akkar

Source

Does anyone have any idea what is going on here? My warning radar is flashing red right now. Maybe it is a false alarm.

Hat tip to Bill (aka The Godfather)

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

A Roman Catholic Who Gets It

From a discussion at the New Liturgical Movement:

"There are several other patriarchs out there who would love full communion with Rome, but out of reverence for Moscow have been awaiting for Moscow to lead. The process of dialogue and reunification has for a long time been held up by Moscow."

Roger, this is the line that much of the Catholic media likes to feed us, but unfortunately it isn't true.

I would like to point out that Patriarch Bartholomew, for all of his friendliness to Rome, has always insisted that we Catholics are heterodox. To this very day, many Greek Orthodox dioceses under Constantinople reject the validity of Catholic sacraments. And you can be sure that if ever Bartholomew were to proclaim reunion with Rome, the Athonites and most of his own bishops will rebel against him.

Same with the Patriarchate of Antioch, which, with Constantinople, is considered as the friendliest to Catholicism. When the Melkite Catholics tried to reunite with the Antiochene Orthodox in 1997 the Antiochenes made it clear that there will be no reconciliation unless the Melkites explicitly rejected all the ecumenical Councils not also recognized by the Orthodox Church.

When Daniel of Moldova was elected Romanian Orthodox Patriarch last year, he made clear that there will be no reunion with Rome. And he is almost as friendly to Catholics as Bartholomew.

The Church of Greece continues to be shot through with anti-Catholicism, and Jerusalem doesnt even recognize Catholic baptisms. As for the Slavic Orthodox -- Serbia, Bulgaria, Czech and Slovak Lands, Poland, OCA -- these follow the indications of Moscow.

Perhaps the most telling fact is that, when the Catholic-Orthodox dialogue appealed in 1999 to all the Orthodox Churches to recognize the validity of Catholic BAPTISMS, NOT A SINGLE Orthodox Church responded to the proposal. Not Constantinople, not Antioch, not Alexandria...

There is a saying that the Orthodox tend to overestimate the division between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, while we Catholics tend to underestimate it.



One could fairly quibble (though I do not) about this being a rather broad generalization, but here is a Roman Catholic who seems to grasp something that far too many of his coreligionists (and not a few Orthodox) do not. Yes there is some diversity of opinion in Orthodoxy on a few points. But this is a breath of fresh air compared to the kumbaya crowd who persistently attempt to minimize the differences between Orthodoxy and Rome and tend to get snarky with those of us who periodically attempt to inject some reality into these discussions.

I am very strongly in favor of improving relations with Rome. There are many obvious areas of mutual interest for both confessions. But as I have noted ad infinitum, I am more than a little skeptical about restoration of communion. I think we have grown too far apart for that to happen without, as Owen the Ochlophobist once observed, one or the other (Orthodoxy or the Roman Catholic Church) ceasing to be what it is.

I am going to leave the comments open but I would ask that comments on Carlos' post be left at the original discussion over at NLM (see the link above).

Monday, December 01, 2008

Something is rotten in Finland

I am not going to belabor this excessively since it has been addressed by Owen the Ochlophobist. However it appears that some really serious problems are cropping up in the small Finnish Orthodox Church. The most serious is what appears to be an openly pro-homosexualist cadre of clergy, some of whom are very close to Archbishop Leo (the primate), that is pushing all kinds of liberal heresy. As Owen's post makes clear, the Russian Church is taking official note of this and does not appear disposed to ignore the efforts of some to create an Orthodox equivalent to the Epsicopal Church.

I hope that the world's other Orthodox churches will send messages of support to the Russian Synod and Patriarch Alexei in this matter while also urging Archbishop Leo to firmly address the very serious problems that appear to be threatening the church given to his care. It would be nice if the Ecumenical Patriarch (who seems always to be looking for reasons to intrude into the canonical territory of other Orthodox churches), would lend his support to this as well. For the canonical Primus Inter Pares this would seem to be the kind of situation that the Fathers had in mind for the exercise of a true Orthodox primacy.

I encourage all to read Owen's post linked above. Also check out the comments there for some links to other related reports.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Must Listening...

The remarks of then bishop Jonah on the eve of his election as Metropolitan. As background he is responding to some tough questions dealing with the various problems and scandals that have plagued the OCA from delegates at the 15th All American Council in Pittsburgh. But the real themes are accountability, love and forgiveness. This is REALLY powerful stuff. I can not recommend it too highly. I don't care if your Orthodox. It works for anyone (though Roman Catholics especially might find much to ponder). Listen to it all and pass the recording to your friends.