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

[nikolayalexandroff]

You are correct.

Peace

As far as I know the RC understanding of the Proceeding was corrected in some official statement about 1996 year and with this correction do not contradict with the Orthodox understanding. But I could not find this statement immediately.

 

[lionroar0]

As far as I know the RC understanding of the Proceeding was corrected in some official statement about 1996 year and with this correction do not contradict with the Orthodox understanding. But I could not find this statement immediately.

Off the top of my head I know that the Council of Florence has it.

I would have to do some research also to finf the statement from 1996

Peace

 

[VickiY]

Have you ever heard Father Anthony Coniaris or Father Samuel 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.

As a matter of correction: Father Stanley Samuel Harakas should not be referred to by his middle name. His baptismal name is Stylianos, so if you simply MUST refer to him by a name that he does not use in general, please refer to him as Father Stylianos.

 

[MariaRegina]

As a matter of correction: Father Stanley Samuel Harakas should not be referred to by his middle name. His baptismal name is Stylianos, so if you simply MUST refer to him by a name that he does not use in general, please refer to him as Father Stylianos.

I was just quoting his name as found in his book on Living the Faith. Unfortunately, my vision was blurred and I couldn't see his first name.

Please forgive my error.



























Sad that it has come to this, VickiY.

If anyone wants to visit a very nice forum where charitable Orthodox priests and laity serve as admins and mods, please do visit byzcath.org.

p.s. I must remind everyone here that I have never been a mod there.

 

[VickiY]

I understand that you were doing so. However, he answers the question on page 298 of his book The Orthodox Church: 455 Questions and Answers, Light and Life Publishing, 1987. Should you own a later edition, the topic number is 398 "Saint Stylianos".

Fr. Stanley states (and I quote from the above) "My baptismal name, needless to say, is not Stanislaus, but Stylianos (feast day, November 26)."

I know, however, that he prefers to use Fr. Stanley S. Harakas on his books, with very few using Fr. Stanley Samuel Harakas. He has never professionally (in his profession as a writer) used Father Stylianos, which simply brings us back to "Use the name your priest told you to use". (And before you can say a single word, Fr. Stanley was the priest at the church I grew up in, and always used Fr. Stanley).

Come to think of it, my cousin always used Fr. Steve, although his name was not Stephen.

 

[MariaRegina]

Is anyone planning on attending the retreat by Father Thomas Hopko at St. Paul Greek Orthodox Church in Irvine, California this October?

 

[DavidBryan]

From what I understand, our "proceed" is very different from what their "proceed" means.

Right. We're single procession: the Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father, but can proceed temporally through the Son.

They're double processionists: the Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son. It's been said some Catholics would have no trouble with saying "From the Father, through the Son." Their creed should, then, reflect this.

This is why I believe unification will never happen. We are so afraid that the True Faith depends on every little detail taht if ANYTHING is conceded on, we cease to be the Church until it is just left to a small skete in the NorthWest part of Mt. Athos. We are so paranoid because 1) we converts seek comfort in the idea that we have all of the answers and that there is one answer, one basic rite, one way to think about the world that anything different threatens this world view we've concocted for ourselves or 2) we cradle Orthodox and we just will not forget the past and will not actually forgive and forget until we love that we can constantly hold past atrocities over the head of the Catholic Church like masters hold a whip over their slaves and no apology or returned relics will ever be enough because it's not the relics we want, it's revenge.

Preach!!

 

[MariaRegina]

Hey, whenever the Pope prays with the Orthodox Patriarch, the 'filioque' clause is dropped.

The Melkites do not say the 'filioque' in their Nicene Creed.

So, it's a moot issue.

The bigger problem is the Papal powers: Papal infallibility and Papal supremacy.

 

[Theophorus]

Hey, whenever the Pope prays with the Orthodox Patriarch, the 'filioque' clause is dropped.

The Melkites do not say the 'filioque' in their Nicene Creed.

So, it's a moot issue.

The bigger problem is the Papal powers: Papal infallibility and Papal supremacy.

I do not have a problem with the Pope-- today. To be honest, Pope John Paul 2 helped to bring me to Orthodoxy. To state it bluntly, if the "power" of the Church was under one bishop, it would be evident, imo. But the Pope has lost control of his church. At least at the levels that concern me and my family.

I know that many here have had RC affiliations at one time and may have better understandings concerning some issues, but I comment as one outside looking in to both . I had to weigh the two in the balance and from the beginning, the Pope was a non issue, and still is. If he's orthodox in belief (and I never heard an unorthodox comment that comes to mind) , and had even half of the direct influence my current bishop has over his priests and parishoners, or the consensus of some protestant denomionations, then I would be the first on board. It' s just not there, at least by what I can observe directly, and I have not prejudiced myself in just one locale, reading, or liturgy, I've attended certian RC sacraments in Italy.

There is no cohesive approach to the sacraments in RC that I have personally seen, weddings, masses, funeruals. Yet in Orthodoxy, even if it was in a foriegn language, it is there. I guess that means in Othodoxy it was coincedence, or it was of importance for some reason. An in the RC, it was not important for some reason.

I defintitely sense a unity to the Orthodox tradition in worship. Even accross language and culture. In RC worship, I got the sense of something locale, something that was for that community only, their tastes, culture and expectations.

Expectations.....hmmmm

I have watched the laws of entropy take hold on every Christian religious institution around me, some faster than others. Is Orthodoxy next? It is the only thing that has survived somewhat intact since my birth and before, that remains accessible.

 

[MariaRegina]

I do not have a problem with the Pope-- today. To be honest, Pope John Paul 2 helped to bring me to Orthodoxy. To state it bluntly, if the "power" of the Church was under one bishop, it would be evident, imo. But the Pope has lost control of his church. At least at the levels that concern me and my family.

I know that many here have had RC affiliations at one time and may have better understandings concerning some issues, but I comment as one outside looking in to both . I had to weigh the two in the balance and from the beginning, the Pope was a non issue, and still is. If he's orthodox in belief (and I never heard an unorthodox comment that comes to mind) , and had even half of the direct influence my current bishop has over his priests and parishoners, or the consensus of some protestant denomionations, then I would be the first on board. It' s just not there, at least by what I can observe directly, and I have not prejudiced myself in just one locale, reading, or liturgy, I've attended certian RC sacraments in Italy.

There is no cohesive approach to the sacraments in RC that I have personally seen, weddings, masses, funeruals. Yet in Orthodoxy, even if it was in a foriegn language, it is there. I guess that means in Othodoxy it was coincedence, or it was of importance for some reason. An in the RC, it was not important for some reason.

I defintitely sense a unity to the Orthodox tradition in worship. Even accross language and culture. In RC worship, I got the sense of something locale, something that was for that community only, their tastes, culture and expectations.

Expectations.....hmmmm

I have watched the laws of entropy take hold on every Christian religious institution around me, some faster than others. Is Orthodoxy next? It is the only thing that has survived somewhat intact since my birth and before, that remains accessible.

I am a convert from Catholicism.

Before Vatican II, a Catholic could go anywhere in the world and understand the Mass because all was in Latin. All the sacraments, the Mass, even Vespers, everything was in Latin except the sermon. We really depended on our missals.

Now all that has changed with cultural differences and liturgical abuses run amuck since Vatican II.

However in Orthodoxy, we have the Divine Liturgy in Church Slavonic, Ecclesiastical Greek and Ecclesiastical Arabic, Romanian, etc. Even though there are many different language in which the Orthodox Divine Services (Divine Liturgy, the Holy Hours, All Night Vigils, and Sacraments) are celebrated, we can tell what is taking place and why. The language of Orthodox worship is universal, devout, respectful, holy, and timeless.

 

[Theophorus]

However in Orthodoxy, we have the Divine Liturgy in Church Slavonic, Ecclesiastical Greek and Ecclesiastical Arabic, Romanian, etc. Even though there are many different language in which the Orthodox Divine Services (Divine Liturgy, the Holy Hours, All Night Vigils, and Sacraments) are celebrated, we can tell what is taking place and why. The language of Orthodox worship is universal, devout, respectful, holy, and timeless.

It is a miracle in itself.

 

[kamikat]

I do not have a problem with the Pope-- today.

Did you read my post #78?
http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=27095012&postcount=78

Sure, it may look like there is no cohesion in the Catholic church, but the assumption of power is still there.

kamikat

 

[nikolayalexandroff]

Off the top of my head I know that the Council of Florence has it.

I would have to do some research also to finf the statement from 1996

Peace

On the vatican.va the link with this document does not work. I found this here: http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt66.html.A rather curious example of the Latin tightrope-walking. I was wrong. Till now I’ve just heard about this document and read retellings of it. Though St. Thomas declared when dying that all written by him is just a straw, RCC continues to build of this straw (1 Ad Cor. 3:12).

 

[lionroar0]

On the vatican.va the link with this document does not work. I found this here: http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt66.html.A rather curious example of the Latin tightrope-walking. I was wrong. Till now I’ve just heard about this document and read retellings of it. Though St. Thomas declared when dying that all written by him is just a straw, RCC continues to build of this straw (1 Ad Cor. 3:12).

Thank you for the Charity I guess the second commadment isn't good enough for you. This will be my last post in TAW. For awhile.

Peace

 

[walking.away.123]

Ancient Faith Radio is playing Fr. Thomas' lectures on the Apocolypse.

http://www.ancientfaithradio.com/schedule_gt.html

 

[Oblio]

Krimey !

I just bought those

 

[KATHXOYMENOC]

Thank you for the Charity I guess the second commadment isn't good enough for you. This will be my last post in TAW. For awhile.

Peace

The Second Commandment? Exodus 20:4-6: "4 You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments."

 

[Xpycoctomos]

The Second Commandment? Exodus 20:4-6: "4 You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments."

He gotcha there lionsroar! lol Now you gotta come back and represent! lol

John
(It's all in good humor bud )

 

[Andrea Elizabeth]

The Creed issue is a small one. If you ask most Catholics, including priests, you will find that it doesn't matter to them. The big issue is the Pope issue. If he is who he claims to be, the Vicar of Christ and God's representative on Earth, then he has the power and authority to change the faith, to add to the faith as he is led to do by the Holy Spirit. This is why unity and inter-communion can only occur if he renounces those titles. He can not be the Vicar of Christ and God's representative on Earth and only have that apply to his dominion, ie the Catholics. As the papal office is today, he can not be just another patriarch in the Eastern Orthodox sense. No unity can occur until the pope renounces those titles.

kamikat

I'm still wondering why we would have to give up anything by offering Catholics communion. I guess communion is more about Bishops who agree with each other on council and canon decisions? I just don't see that we would have to put ourselves under the Pope to offer it to them. Technically the excommunication has been lifted anyway, right?

 

[DavidBryan]

I'm still wondering why we would have to give up anything by offering Catholics communion. I guess communion is more about Bishops who agree with each other on council and canon decisions? I just don't see that we would have to put ourselves under the Pope to offer it to them. Technically the excommunication has been lifted anyway, right?

The anathema has been lifted, but not by the whole Church, just the EP. What we'd basically have to do, if we just communed with RCs with nothing changing on either their part or ours, is say that it's OK to have one bishop be the supreme bishop. Being in communion with the pope would be the requirement for being in the Church, and we'd have to give the "Amen" to this.

This goes against everything the Church has always been. No one bishop is the bond of unity in the Church--any bishop with Orthodox belief who is celebrating the Eucharist surrounded by his presbyters and flock constitutes the whole Church, with or without any one bishop's approval. Communing with Catholics would be saying we're in agreement with their error.