Fr. Thomas Hopko's lecture - what do you think?

[Xpycoctomos]

I don't think it really matters that much. If she was told to call him Fr Tom... she has permission. If we weren't, we don't. I would never call my preist by a nickname, but apparently a preist of someone here prefers Fr. Nick to Nicholas. I doubt St. Nicholas is offended and apparently the priest isn't. so. There's that.

 

[walking.away.123]

I think Fr. Hopko explained things accurately. I think the EO can look to the Eastern rites of the Catholic Church-If there were a union, the Eastern Churches would retain their Eastern theology, rites, customs, precepts, fillioque-less creed--everything.

I'm almost certain that the Eastern Rite churches took on Catholic theology, including the filloque. I'm certain the former Nestorian Eastern Rite churches had to accept the Council of Calcedon.
S.

 

[Matrona]

Maybe Father Hopko asked people to call him Father Tom at a special youth/college gathering and that is his privilege to do so, but in all the adult retreats he has given which I have attended (too many to count), no one has ever addressed him as Father Tom, not even his brother Priests.

I think I recall only one older teen calling him Father Tom at one retreat and a hush fell over the audience with some sudden intakes of air, like saying, "That really wasn't cool."

If she wants to call him Fr. Tom, that's her prerogative. I really don't think it's your place to judge.

 

[MariaRegina]

Self-righteous talk?

That is one thing that Father Thomas Hopko frowns upon.

Would that we would all be a little more courteous and well mannered.

I guess his dream of unity is dashed until the Last Judgment.

 

[choirfiend]

I only just wish I could see Fr. Tom more often. He pastored my mother when she was young, and now that he's traveling, he's harder to catch, even at the monastery. In fact, last time we were there, we didn't get to see him--but we stayed in his house since he was gone! He's always been a blessing to my growth in the Church--I hope everyone gets to know him, at lectures or otherwise!

 

[Matrona]

I guess his dream of unity is dashed until the Last Judgment.

Roman Catholics can join the Orthodox Church ANY TIME THEY WANT. It's not like we're holding them back! As long as their desire is sincere and absolute, the desire to cast off all the false dogmas, doctrines, and teachings taught by the Roman Catholic religion, and unite themselves to the Body of Christ, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church... then I say come on in!

If they're not ready to completely convert, then it's BETTER that those presently belonging to Roman Catholicism stay outside the Church, just as a catechumen might be told to wait a little while longer before coming into the Church, so he can be completely prepared and not rush into something he's not ready for. And sometimes a catechumen is totally prepared, but Father might still tell him to wait, because the rest of his family isn't yet ready and Father wants them to enter together.

 

[Greg the byzantine]

Self-righteous talk?

That is one thing that Father Thomas Hopko frowns upon.

Would that we would all be a little more courteous and well mannered.

I guess his dream of unity is dashed until the Last Judgment.

Well calling somebody out for it , can be misconstrued as self-righteous, since the willingness to correct might come from a feeling of superiority in one's own manner of speech or use of language.

 

[Ilian]

I'm almost certain that the Eastern Rite churches took on Catholic theology, including the filloque. I'm certain the former Nestorian Eastern Rite churches had to accept the Council of Calcedon.

All Eastern Catholics must accept the dogmatic formulations of the Western Church, 22 "ecumenical" councils in all. Oddly, about a decade ago the Melkite synod passed a resolution saying they didn't view the post schism councils as ecumenical (all but two bishops voted in favor). The Vatican sent back a reply nicely saying, "oh yes you do".

Some EC's have adopted the Filioque, not necessarily because they had to, but because they went through a process of self Latinization. Up until the 1990's, the Ruthenian church in this country recited the Filioque. Some Ukrainian churches still do.

The main issue is the Eastern Catholics accepted existence in a framework of Roman ecclesiology as the price of re-entering communion with Rome. This acceptance fostered the trickling down of them accepting the violations of their own tradition. This unfortunately is not something in the past, but is extremely current.

Regardless, both sides have acknowledged this is not a model that will work for reconciliation of East and West. The Vatican already disavowed Uniatism as a model of reconciliation anyway.

 

[Xpycoctomos]

Ilian, thanks for the infor about the perrogatives of the EP. Very informative.

 

[latinorthodox]

What's the purpose if it is just honorific? It used to mean something. Certainly not what Rome has made of it (even many Roman Theologians will admit to this... including the current Pope to an extent) but I don't think it's what we have UNmade of it either. Otherwise it's just a useless title.

as i am not that well informed and haven't studied about this matter enough to give a clear answer,i will admit that the truth must be somewhere in between,more than we hold about the Pope's prerogatives and less than catholics hold(i still don't know exactly how much).i used to think the bishop of the See of Rome was given a special honour because it was the capital of the Empire,and so it had to do more with matters of political influence than of cleric supremacy.but again,i am not well informed and do not want to make statements with no sure back-up.

 

[kamikat]

I only just wish I could see Fr. Tom more often. He pastored my mother when she was young, and now that he's traveling, he's harder to catch, even at the monastery. In fact, last time we were there, we didn't get to see him--but we stayed in his house since he was gone! He's always been a blessing to my growth in the Church--I hope everyone gets to know him, at lectures or otherwise!

He has family that belong to my church, so he comes to my church somewhat frequently. I think I've heard him preach the homily or lecture 3 times in the 6 months that I've been going there. Every time he preaches or speaks, he always touches on something I happen to be struggling with at the time. I LOVE to hear him speak. BTW, I've only heard him called Fr Tom at my church.

kamikat

 

[gzt]

though i'm sure you've occasionally heard him referred to as "pope tom", or at least the priests i know who went to seminary under him do so occasionally.

 

[choirfiend]

And as per the joke he always tells in lectures, according to his seminary students, his mother is the "Tomotokos."

 

[walking.away.123]

I only just wish I could see Fr. Tom more often. He pastored my mother when she was young, and now that he's traveling, he's harder to catch, even at the monastery. In fact, last time we were there, we didn't get to see him--but we stayed in his house since he was gone! He's always been a blessing to my growth in the Church--I hope everyone gets to know him, at lectures or otherwise!

You're so lucky, I get so much out of hearing him speak. I have 4 of his lecture series recorded from AFR and a few short ones I've listened to maybe 5 times now. He's my No. 2 favorite Orthodox lecturer after Bp. KALLISTOS.

 

[KATHXOYMENOC]

You're so lucky, I get so much out of hearing him speak. I have 4 of his lecture series recorded from AFR and a few short ones I've listened to maybe 5 times now. He's my No. 2 favorite Orthodox lecturer after Bp. KALLISTOS.

Have you had a chance to hear Father Patrick Henry Reardon?

 

[walking.away.123]

Have you had a chance to hear Father Patrick Henry Reardon?

I have.

 

[KATHXOYMENOC]

I have.

I've heard them both, but only one occasion each (live, that is). That's not enough to really know them or their breadth and depth.

 

[MariaRegina]

Have you ever heard Father Anthony Coniaris or Father Stanley Harakas?

They are great. I don't know if they travel anymore, but I heard them in the late 1990's. Their books contain wonderful meditations too.

 

[Theophorus]

Dear friends,

Below is a link to a lecture given by Fr. Thomas Hopko (dean emeritus of St. Vladimirs Semminary) about what would be necessary for a complete union between the Orthodox and the Romans:

http://www.doy.org/viewpast.asp?ID=2027

I'd like to know your opinion about it. Do you agree? Disagree? why?

In XC,
Rick

The most important thing is not a desire for unity. A very important thing is the essentials, which he introduces and does not expand on. I also do not care for the implications that there are essentials and non essentials. Been there, done that.

Are icons essentials?
Is triple immersion baptism essentials?
Is communing infants essentials?
Is fasting for 40+ days before Pascha essentials?
Is a cappella services essentials?
Are male only alter boys essentials?

Is it stupid that only a priest or deacon can distribute the Eucharist?, is it acceptable to accept the Eucharist in your hand and skip the chalice because of fear of germs or inconvenience? How would a discusion on essentials concerning this turn out? And I fully agree with Fr. Hopko that sharing communion equals unity.

If the perspective shifts to essentials versus non essentials, economia will become obsolete. New dogmas that have never existed before will take hold for the sake of unity, and other dogmas or firmly held traditions will be cast asside. What appears to be inclusive at first will become exclusive, for the sake of unity.

(Sorry to rant so late in the game, but I missed this thread until now.)

 

[MariaRegina]

Big "T" versus Little "t"

Essentials versus Non-essentials

A lesson from history:

Please listen to the first few minutes of this ancient recording:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6AOvStZS64

Notice how Bishop Fulton Sheen says in 1941 that the Church does not change ancient customs but holds onto them. What happened about twenty years later with Vatican II? Why were so many ancient customs tossed out all in the name of the so-called Big T versus the little unessential t?

Look at some of the changes in the Catholic Church:
(1) A new Mass with prayers being added and others discarded
(2) A new Nicene Creed
(3) Women Eucharistic Ministers
(4) Female Altar Servers
(5) A complete revision of all the seven Sacraments
(6) A complete revision of the prayers of exorcism
(7) Dropping of the prayers to St. Michael to protect us from Satan said at the end of the Mass before 1962
(8) A dramatic increase in the number of exorcisms performed in Rome within the last ten years

Have we Orthodox made changes and concessions? Yes. I will name at least three:

(1) The New Calendar was adopted around 1921. Is the Old Calendar one of those non-essentials? And doesn't the new calendar lessen the days of fasting since the Apostles Fast is affected?

(2) A few Orthodox Theologians have been discussing changing the date of Pascha as they do in the Finnish Orthodox Church so that it coincides with Western Easter. Is this another non-essential then? What will happen with the Holy Fire in Jerusalem that is calculated on the Old Calendar?

(3) The Divine Liturgy according the Greek Typica was shortened around 1920 by the removal of the Beatitudes and some of the post-communion litanies, especially the prayers for the faithful departed and the catechumens. Are these prayers then non-essential?