(Controversial; TAW only) Orthodox position on the first Assisi event of 1986?

zippy2006 said:

Okay, thanks. Out of curiosity: what is the Orthodox definition of the heresy of ecumenism? Perhaps allowance of idol worship in sacred spaces is an example of the heresy, but what is the definition of the heresy?

Click to expand...

essentially it's the dumbing down of the faith to the lowest common denominator, making Truth relative.

zippy2006 said:

Short answer: Fr. Matt was speaking about an uninformed layman.

Click to expand...

After so many of these types of encounters, at what point does that stop being a defense...they must be getting this 'uninformation' from somewhere, right?

The problems of papal arbitration are legion, but that doesn't mean that popes are incapable of heresy, or that the Pope is owed slavish obedience.

Click to expand...

Maybe not owed, but given as a matter of ecclesiological principle (again, following Vatican I's declaration that it is unlawful to appeal to a synod as though they are a source higher than the Roman Pontiff and similar statements that place him above the entire church).

Your sources aren't talking about heresy. Without digging up the academic sources, I could just refer you to Edward Feser who has written on this a few times in recent years. Here is a relevant post:

[An] exceptional situation might arise were a pope to become a public heretic, i.e., were he publicly and officially to teach some doctrine clearly opposed to what has been defined as de fide catholicâ… n this case many theologians hold that no formal sentence of deposition would be required, as, by becoming a public heretic, the pope would ipso facto cease to be pope.

(Feser quoting the Catholic Encyclopedia)​

Click to expand...

This is likewise not talking about forcible deposition, is it? I thought I was clear that this is what I mean about a lack of oversight. This is simply saying that if the Pope were to publicly manifest heresy in these particular ways, he would (somehow), by virtue of having done so, magically stop being the Pope.

Besides, I'm sure it could be argued by many (not a few Catholics among them) that things like the Assisi events are just such a public manifestation of heresy, and yet Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI were not ipso facto 'unpoped' or whatever. So what does this even do? It's not really effective oversight.

We rely on what we believe to be instituted by Christ. We don't believe in a man-made institution and we don't decide ourselves how to make it. Similar and other problems exist on Conciliarism.

Click to expand...

Problems, sure, but how similar they are is not all that clear to me.

Nickles and dimes. Problematic leaders are indicative of problematic cultures, and problematic cultures influence institutions just as much as they influence leaders. A strong central authority can impede or catalyze problematic cultures (e.g. Pope Paul VI). The idea that you're going to solve these issues by way of systemic considerations is fundamentally flawed (and, ironically, strongly modern in character).

Click to expand...

I'm not intending or pretending to solve any Roman's problems. I'm not a member of your church anymore, so the only thing that really compels me to say anything is that I've been there myself and it didn't feel healthy, and I care about the people who are still there that they are not spiritually starved or abused in the name of the institution. I have said as much in the past in more appropriate venues than this regarding some excesses among the leaders of my own Church (e.g., HE Met. Bishoy) who apparently thought their word was law and were reminded afterwards by the holy synod that they need to just be quiet sometimes. This is how it should be when it needs to be.

If and when the synod devolves you will have the same exact problems. 'Synodality' isn't a cure for evil.

Click to expand...

When did I say that it was? I do believe that one is healthier than the other, but my point is not "my church is better than your church", but rather "your church's way of being robs you of what you deserve, and used to actually have, and that's not something I'm okay with."

I just thank Our Lord that the church, is indeed, much bigger than one man, one Pope, or several Popes!

ArmyMatt said:

going there to talk is fine, anything else is wrong.

plus, it only showed what a heretic Pope John Paul II was, and how enticing the heresies of ecumenism and secularism are.

these kinds of things make my stomach turn.

Click to expand...

But Father, aren't the Orthodox bishops who assisted to the event guilty of the same sins as Pope John Paul II?

David Cabrera said:

But Father, aren't the Orthodox bishops who assisted to the event guilty of the same sins as Pope John Paul II?

Click to expand...

did they allow pagan idols on Orthodox altars? I certainly hope not.

ArmyMatt said:

did they allow pagan idols on Orthodox altars? I certainly hope not.

Click to expand...

Sure, Father. Nevertheless, they were participants of the act.

Lost4words said:

I just thank Our Lord that the church, is indeed, much bigger than one man, one Pope, or several Popes!

Click to expand...

I dunno, Vatican I said an infallible declaration from the Pope is above any council, and Pope Pius (X I think) said even if you know that the Pope is the devil, you are only to obey.

David Cabrera said:

Sure, Father. Nevertheless, they were participants of the act.

Click to expand...

that doesn't make them guilty of the same sins as Pope JP II.

ArmyMatt said:

that doesn't make them guilty of the same sins as Pope JP II.

Click to expand...

Isn't someone who participates equally responsible?

David Cabrera said:

Isn't someone who participates equally responsible?

Click to expand...

not always.

TheLostCoin said:

Why aren’t they equally responsible in this case, considering that they sang prayers along side every other religion?

Click to expand...

because they weren't the ones putting idols on their own altars.

TheLostCoin said:

So is it okay to pray together with Pagans and Infidels (Monotheists who reject Christ?)

Click to expand...

no, but that wasn't your initial question.

zippy2006 said:

[An] exceptional situation might arise were a pope to become a public heretic, i.e., were he publicly and officially to teach some doctrine clearly opposed to what has been defined as de fide catholicâ… n this case many theologians hold that no formal sentence of deposition would be required, as, by becoming a public heretic, the pope would ipso facto cease to be pope.

(Feser quoting the Catholic Encyclopedia)

Click to expand...

That is simply a rehash of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy

prodromos said:

That is simply a rehash of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy

Click to expand...

...not even sure where to start with this one...

Personally, I do not think the Orthodox hierarchs or the Pope are guilty of anything. Obviously the non Christians probably just think everyone is just trying to be nice.

I just think the Orthodox & other Christian clerics lack wisdom and are usually poor leaders.

TheLostCoin said:

Didn't the Eastern Orthodox Bishops do this?

Click to expand...

do what?

TheLostCoin said:

So is it okay to pray together with Pagans and Infidels (Monotheists who reject Christ?)

Click to expand...

There's an interesting event in the Bible that speaks about one situation where this happens. 2 Kings 5:17-19

Given that passage in scripture, I believe the general answer would be sometimes it can be okay to pray together with Pagans and Infidels.