The most difficult apologetics

[Veritas]

Maybe it's just me, but some of the posts in this thread came dangerously closes to debate. I thought that was now "verboten", no? Anyway, what the OP hoped to accomplish, I'm not sure other than stirring the pot some.

 

[KennySe]

Well, I got curious and looked at the essay in the link of the OP.
I shouldn't have, as I will comment on what I have read.

And I should have, as some of my fellow Catholics have; and the essay may cause some unease. The article must be addressed, even if only briefly by me.

#1. Right off the bat. Straight away.
The title. "Christian Orthodoxy vs. Roman Catholicism".

I am really really SICK of the term 'Roman Catholicism", and the Bishop pits East vs West. He uses "vs." and not "and". He provides "Christian" to "Orthodoxy", while he provides "Roman" to "Catholicism".
THERE AIN'T A "ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. THERE AIN'T a "CATECHISM OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH".

How's that for just reading the title?

#2. "Since Rome was the seat of the Empire, the Bishop of Rome was honoured by the other prelates as first among equals (primus inter pares), solely, however, in deference to his position as the Bishop of the Capital".

"Solely".

Then the Chair of Peter had nothing to do with it, per the Bishop.
The Chair of Peter doesn't get mentioned.

***

Peace be with all of my Christian brethren.

 

[KennySe]

Well, I decided to read the rest of the article, and had intended to not comment further.

And while this may upset some of you, I MUST comment. Not on the premise of the sentence but on what I will underline.

"These five Patriarchs constituted administrative sections of the One, Holy, Apostolic, Orthodox Church, which was governed democratically; that is, one section neither infringe upon the jurisdictional rights of the other nor intervened with its affairs."

Notice anything missing?

Just a coincidence? NO. Not a coincidence. The Bishop wrote the article. he knew exactly what he was writing, and I see exactly what he infers here.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Kenny

now don't get your blood pressure all riled up!

I read the article too . it is very biased, lots of stuff left out, some stuff misrepresented . . but there are deep seated biases within Eastern Orthodoxy agains the Catholic Church. I grew up in it, and I was exposed to it . . it is not surprising to see something like this on the internet . . .

There are two issues here . . the first is the obvous bias . . the second is that of facts . .

Don't let the bias eat at you . . there are those within Orthodoxy who want to see the 2 united . .there are those who do not . . and they have deep seated reasons why not. . .

Peace in Him!

 

[Veritas]

I've heard it on good authority that there are patriarch's in the Orthodox communion who would like to re-unite with "Rome", but the deeply ingrained bias toward Catholicism and the pope make it difficult. If they come in, they want to bring their people with them. (Not trying to offend anyone)

 

[Amandine]

I don't think is a good smiley anymore.



I was extremly curious to this issue and the Catholic defense of it, but since it's not doing any good a moderator can close it down.
-Catherine

 

[MariaRegina]

I've heard it on good authority that there are patriarch's in the Orthodox communion who would like to re-unite with "Rome", but the deeply ingrained bias toward Catholicism and the pope make it difficult. If they come in, they want to bring their people with them. (Not trying to offend anyone)

Just curious, is this the good authority you heard? Or have you heard something else?

http://www.christianforums.com/t79190&highlight=Antiochian

 

[KennySe]

(removed by KennySe)

 

[Axion]

I think the person who wrote the article referenced in the OP is of a controversialist nature. He seeks to overemphasise and magnify the differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. There are some Orthodox who take this path, and nurse old grievances, but hopefully not anything like the majority.

As an example of overstating differences. The writer condemns the doctrine of Purgatory, then goes on to describe an orthodox belief that is far closer to what protestants allege that Catholics teach about purgatory (2nd chance of salvation), than what Catholics actually do teach.

What he says on the Immaculate Conception is extremely confusing, since I was under the impression that the Orthodox did not teach a doctrine of original Sin.