the Orthodox Church

[OrthodoxyUSA]

mulligan!

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

This is all very inventive... attempting to set standards to the EO.

The EO Churches are a plurality.

The Church of Rome is a singularity.

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

why does that beg the question why i am Catholic? i am just trying to understand the paradigm that the EO are working from, are all Bishops equal or not? when you talk about the authority of the Pope you talk about them all being equal, but when you talk about the Schism it seems there are only 4 Bishops in the whole world??? it is just inconsitant

why am i catholic? i believe that that the Catholic Church is the Church that Christ founded, I am sorry if i have seemed disrespectful to the Orthodox Church, i really do love your Church and am greatful for the good work it has done proclaiming the Gospels to soooooo many people all over the world
I think that Christ left the Church as a visible sign for the world, so they can see that Christ saves, now lets say it is 1628, i am some poor illiterate pesant, am i going to be able to read many history books and study which Christian Church is the true Church? EO, OO, RC, Anglican or any of the breakaway groups from those three? God would leave a sign for that person, something easy to see, something that even simple people can understand, that sign is the office of the Pope, if you are in communion with the Pope you are part of the Church that Christ founded, if not, then you have seperated yourself from the Church. Now if you read many books on theology and history and the writtings of the early church fathers, i think you will come to the same POV (though many people read these things and do not come to the same POV) but it is not needed

Tell me dear friend how it is that The Church of Antioch and Jerusalem broke away from Rome when they never answered to Rome in the first place. You've got the tail wagging the dog their friend.

These Churches no longer shared communion. One was never the underling of the other. ALL were Churches. Fully capable of offering all the sacraments. Jerusalem nor Antioch do not and have never required permission from Rome to offer the sacraments.

The premise of your argument is false. ROME was not, nor is now, THE CHURCH. She is a Church.

Jerusalem and Antioch NEVER belonged to ROME.

EVER.

Forgive me...

 

[ProScribe]

I am torn betwix the 2

Philip 1:23 For I am being pressed from out of the two. The desire having into the be up-loose and together to Christ to be much rather better.

Textus Rec.) Philippians 1:23 sunecomai gar ek twn duo thn epiqumian ecwn eiV to analusai kai sun cristw einai pollw mallon kreisson

Says hello to LittleLambofJesus.

 

[Warrior Poet]

I love the Orthodox Church!

Warrior Poet

 

[Rhamiel]

This is all very inventive... attempting to set standards to the EO.

The EO Churches are a plurality.

The Church of Rome is a singularity.

Forgive me...

the Catholic Church is made up of several Rites, there are Eastern Rites with their own Patriarches, the EO is a plurality, the Catholic Church is a plurality as well

Tell me dear friend how it is that The Church of Antioch and Jerusalem broke away from Rome when they never answered to Rome in the first place. You've got the tail wagging the dog their friend.

These Churches no longer shared communion. One was never the underling of the other. ALL were Churches. Fully capable of offering all the sacraments. Jerusalem nor Antioch do not and have never required permission from Rome to offer the sacraments.

The premise of your argument is false. ROME was not, nor is now, THE CHURCH. She is a Church.

Jerusalem and Antioch NEVER belonged to ROME.

EVER.

Forgive me...

when i say broke away i ment they broke communion, not that they were lesser then the Church of Rome

I love the Orthodox Church!

Warrior Poet

me too

 

[Etsi]

the Catholic Church is made up of several Rites, there are Eastern Rites with their own Patriarches, the EO is a plurality, the Catholic Church is a plurality as well

when i say broke away i ment they broke communion, not that they were lesser then the Church of Rome

me too

It was Rome that broke communion.

 

[Sphinx777]

It was Rome that broke communion.

​

 

[Musa80]

 

[laconicstudent]

*watches thread spiral into:

"You broke Communion first!"

"No you!"

"No you!"

*

 

[Sphinx777]

 

[laconicstudent]

*watches approach of*

 

[Musa80]

Mods....

 

[Rhamiel]

hahaha, wow, ok funny animal thread now

 

[Montalban]

What do you want us to discuss--whether or not you are reading a book on the subject? If so, I take the affirmative in this debate and submit as evidence the OP!
I guess we don't know what about the book interests you enough to bring it to the attention of the rest of us.

Who's for the negative?

Okay,

I'm not reading a book.

 

[Eucharisted]

*watches thread spiral into:

"You broke Communion first!"

"No you!"

"No you!"

*

"No I'm Catholic!"

"No I'm Catholic!"

"No I'M Catholic!"

"No I'm Catholic!"

"No I'M Catholic!"
"NO I'M CATHOLIC!"

 

[Warrior Poet]

me too

As posted by another brother who shares your symbol:

The Catholic Church is waiting for you separated brethern with open doors.

I have no doubt you love them, but perhaps in a different way then I was expressing.

Warrior Poet

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

the Catholic Church is made up of several Rites, there are Eastern Rites with their own Patriarches, the EO is a plurality, the Catholic Church is a plurality as well...

You are equating "Rites" with Patriarchates. Is that what you think of us? We're just an Eastern Rite to you? All the "Rites of Rome" answer to Rome. There is only one Patriarchate.

There are many Patriarchates in the EO.

For instance... I belong to the Patriarchate of Antioch.

Forgive me...

 

[mark46]

While there are many so-called doctrinal differences. I suspect that a council could remove this animosity. To equate the EO (and presumably OO) as mere rites within the Church seems uninformed or certainyl disengenuous.

Am I far off to believe that the core issue of division is really that the Patriarch of Rome needs to accept that he is one of many patriarches? I understand that there are other issues, minor to this outsider to the controversy. The Nicene Creed needed no addition. The two statements of the pope from the chair of Peter are meaningless. Infallibility of the church should be discussed and understood, and perhaps the doctrines surrounding the Mother of God should also be discussed and understood.

Yes, I understand that followers of EO, OO and RCC are willing to fight and argue on earth and in heaven, but I suspect that the leadership will have a different approach. Whether there are two lungs of the Church as a pope indicated a few years ago, or 5 or 6 or 10, there is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, founded by Jesus with doctrines clarified by the early church councils.

You are equating "Rites" with Patriarchates. Is that what you think of us? We're just an Eastern Rite to you? All the "Rites of Rome" answer to Rome. There is only one Patriarchate.

There are many Patriarchates in the EO.

For instance... I belong to the Patriarchate of Antioch.

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Am I far off to believe that the core issue of division is really that the Patriarch of Rome needs to accept that he is one of many patriarches?

That is the major problem.

Forgive me...