Why are the Orthodox being taught this? [Moved from OBOB]

Montalban · Apr 24, 2010

Philothei said:
I fail to see how ethno-centricity is a EO phenomenon.... Do the "irish" or "italian" or "spanish" catholic communiities in any US city would count as such?

I can not tell what it is like in the US. I am simply giving you what I have expereienced. I am not even attempting to say that this is normal behaviour throughout Orthodoxy here in Australia

When I attended Catholic church in my own suburb the parish was full of people there were from everywhere.

When I went to one Antiochian Orthodox parish - to the dedicated English service EVERYONE but me was of Arabic speaking background. After church, the people gathered for 'fellowship' and all spoke in Arabic. Then someone might say "Oh, sorry! We forgot you were there" remembering that I was standing right there while they talked in Arabic.

Philothei said:
I mean people normally and according to social laws do tend to "congregate" togethere into different ethnos group..

I accept this, but note well that a "Greek Orthodox Church" in Australia is likely to have mostly Greeks, or people who've married Greeks. A Catholic church here won't usually be one ethnic group.

My experience with the Antiochian church was repeated when I went to a Greek Orthodox parish for a 'talk' on the Bible. It was an open invitiation to people to come to a church hall and hear about the NT and its place within Orthodoxy. There were opening prayers in Greek. Everyone there but me was either Greek, or married to a Greek. I was told about this by a friend of my mum's and she didn't even come up and say hello to me.

English is not even a language used regularly in Greek Orthodox parishes. I went to Antiochian Orthodox churches because they advertised a regular English service. The Greek churches have English at one parish one week, then the English service moves to another parish the next week, and so on, on a cycle of about five parishes including one in Wollongong which is a totally different city 82 kilometres (51 mi) south of Sydney. I am aprox. 23 kilometres (14 mi) west of Sydney, you can do the maths to work out the distance between me and Wollongong.

Philothei said:
I think that instead of "judging" the EO or any parish as ethnocentric we have to look at our own predjudice and biases.

I expect perhaps your experiences have been different to mine.

I shall say nothing more on this here. I only commented initially at remark by Lionroar; the disaster of condemning an Orthodox for seeking out Western Rite Orthodox.

Philothei · Apr 24, 2010

Montalban said:
I can not tell what it is like in the US. I am simply giving you what I have expereienced. I am not even attempting to say that this is normal behaviour throughout Orthodoxy here in Australia

When I attended Catholic church in my own suburb the parish was full of people there were from everywhere.

When I went to one Antiochian Orthodox parish - to the dedicated English service EVERYONE but me was of Arabic speaking background. After church, the people gathered for 'fellowship' and all spoke in Arabic. Then someone might say "Oh, sorry! We forgot you were there" remembering that I was standing right there while they talked in Arabic.

I accept this, but note well that a "Greek Orthodox Church" in Australia is likely to have mostly Greeks, or people who've married Greeks. A Catholic church here won't usually be one ethnic group.

My experience with the Antiochian church was repeated when I went to a Greek Orthodox parish for a 'talk' on the Bible. It was an open invitiation to people to come to a church hall and hear about the NT and its place within Orthodoxy. There were opening prayers in Greek. Everyone there but me was either Greek, or married to a Greek. I was told about this by a friend of my mum's and she didn't even come up and say hello to me.

English is not even a language used regularly in Greek Orthodox parishes. I went to Antiochian Orthodox churches because they advertised a regular English service. The Greek churches have English at one parish one week, then the English service moves to another parish the next week, and so on, on a cycle of about five parishes including one in Wollongong which is a totally different city 82 kilometres (51 mi) south of Sydney. I am aprox. 23 kilometres (14 mi) west of Sydney, you can do the maths to work out the distance between me and Wollongong.

I expect perhaps your experiences have been different to mine.

I shall say nothing more on this here. I only commented initially at remark by Lionroar; the disaster of condemning an Orthodox for seeking out Western Rite Orthodox.

I do not think this is appropriate place to discuss this and sorry for putting your post on the spot... I understand how frustrating it can be for someone to hear all other people talk in a foreign language while you cannot participate. Like I said Orthdooxy is "young" in Australia. I am sorry you have to pay the price for this

I do not know if "condeming an orthodox seeking the western rite" is something worth noted here as it depends on who did this and why?

I mean there are many Orthodox mingling in TAW some do not even know or heard of this Western rite... Again we are new to this. It started by the Antiocheans.... Most churches do not even have one single parish I know the GOA does not. So excuse our ignorance.... here. I wonder how many Catholics are familiar with the Eastern rite Ukranian rite too.. I do not mean to bring it as ta que qua but to illustrate how we are not familiar for this liturgical expression.Up to the 1054 there was no intermingling of our liturgical traditions...as it was I cannot imagine that after that there was ANY communication or shared liturgical traditions so....there we are both unfamiliar to its other's traditions.

Thekla · Apr 24, 2010

Is the Mozarabic Rite still in use in the Catholic Church ?

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Thekla said:
How does this relate to the "two lung" theory ?

There is no two lung theory, just an analogy to describe the Catholic Church.

The two lungs refer to the Catholic Church East and West. It does not refer to the EO.

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Fitch said:
You're mistaken:

The comments were made on June 28, 1998 during the visit of Greek Orthodox Metropolitan John of Pergamon.

I've not been here long enough to link.

The two lungs do breath inside the body... East and West, the EO need to reunite back to the body so they can breath with the Catholic Church.

Montalban · Apr 24, 2010

benedictaoo said:
The two lungs do breath inside the body... East and West, the EO need to reunite back to the body so they can breath with the Catholic Church.

We're doing fine, thanks.

Montalban · Apr 24, 2010

benedictaoo said:
The EO believe they do, that it is they that has that fullness but I don't know how they think that seeing how they don't have a huge part of it- Peter.

Firstly we got four of the five major Sees; Jerusalem, Constantinople, Alexandria and Anticoh.

We have Antioch, founded by Peter.

Although in a sense you do too; the Catholic church recognises THREE separate Antiochan patriarchs!

How many lungs is that?

Thekla · Apr 24, 2010

benedictaoo said:
There is no two lung theory, just an analogy to describe the Catholic Church.

The two lungs refer to the Catholic Church East and West. It does not refer to the EO.

Thanks (this has been confusing ).
The EO rejects Augustine's understanding of "original sin", among other theological concepts more typical of the western lung. Are the Byzantine Rite Churches in this matter theologically in accord with the EO or with the CC ?

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Thekla said:
Thanks (this has been confusing ).
The EO rejects Augustine's understanding of "original sin", among other theological concepts more typical of the western lung. Are the Byzantine Rite Churches in this matter theologically in accord with the EO or with the CC ?

The theories are all very reconcilable.

It's unfortunate that you Orthodox guys don't think it is and won't open your minds up to the West.

I find no discrepancy. It's like your theories, which are beautiful and awesome, are the same, just underdeveloped. We, West, bring it all the way home.

It's like the East and West are the total package. But the Orthodox think theology is exclusively Eastern and it must say stuck way back in the 4th century.

I'm sorry that even in Augustine's day, which he is pre schism, your minds were very open to accepting where the Spirit was going.

Thekla · Apr 24, 2010

benedictaoo said:
The theories are all very reconcilable.

It's unfortunate that you Orthodox guys don't think it is and won't open your minds up to the West.

I find no discrepancy. It's like your theories, which are beautiful and awesome, are the same, just underdeveloped. We, West, bring it all the way home.

It's like the East and West are the total package. But the Orthodox think theology is exclusively Eastern and it must say stuck way back in the 4th century.

I'm sorry that even in Augustine's day, which he is pre schism, your minds were very open to accepting where the Spirit was going.

Thank-you, but I don't think my question is answered by this.

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Montalban said:
Firstly we got four of the five major Sees; Jerusalem, Constantinople, Alexandria and Anticoh.

We have Antioch, founded by Peter.

Although in a sense you do too; the Catholic church recognises THREE separate Antiochan patriarchs!

How many lungs is that?

You don't have the See of Peter. The see of Peter is Rome, not Antioch.

Y'all really think you can make it in life with out the West. Wow. anyway....

I don't know what lung you use to breath with because the two lungs are inside the body. Maybe you have an artificial lung, I don't know.

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Thekla said:
Thank-you, but I don't think my question is answered by this.

what was your question? Or was it an implication?

Do the Byzantine Catholic reject the teachings of the Church? You are implying some fake unity?

This is not the fist time that's been implied. The EO rationalizes the union by saying, it's fake. They give lip service but they roll their eyes at us in private.

They can believe what they want because it doesn't conflict. You think it does, oh well, what do you want from us?

Its that the Eastern hold outs think the West needs to drop what the Western holds in order to reunite.

Thekla · Apr 24, 2010

benedictaoo said:
what was your question? Or was it an implication?

Do the Byzantine Catholic reject the teachings of the Church? You are implying some fake unity?

This is not the fist time that's been implied. The EO rationalizes the union by saying, it's fake. They give lip service but they roll their eyes at us in private.

They can believe what they want because it doesn't conflict. You think it does, oh well, what do you want from us?

Its that the Eastern hold outs think the West needs to drop what the Western holds in order to reunite.

I asked because I don't know the answer.
I do see a conflict in the theological understanding, thus my question.

Aeyamar · Apr 24, 2010

benedictaoo said:
There is no two lung theory, just an analogy to describe the Catholic Church.

The two lungs refer to the Catholic Church East and West. It does not refer to the EO.

benedictaoo said:
The two lungs do breath inside the body... East and West, the EO need to reunite back to the body so they can breath with the Catholic Church.

Okay, I think I already countered the claim that the "two lungs" refer exclusively to rites within the Catholic church pages ago. That interpretation is wrong. And the worst part about this is our Orthodox guests on the thread might take your word for it and believe what you say. I'll just link to my previous post so I don't have to restate why:

Aeyamar said:
So... incorrect. The two lungs is in fact referring to the EO and CC. The reason the CC is trying so hard for reunification, is that it recognizes that the sacraments and ordinations inf the EO are valid. That is, Christ is physically present in their Eucharist in the same way he is present in ours. Naturally, the idea that churches having the body of Christ and Apostolic succession are not in communion with each other is a tragedy. It has nothing to do with whether one church can get along without one another. It has to do with the fact that the body of Christ must be whole again and not divided like it is now.

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Thekla said:
I asked because I don't know the answer.
I do see a conflict in the theological understanding, thus my question.

But you can keep on believing that Eastern theology, because in essence, there isn't a real difference.

But I understand you believe there is, or there wouldn't be a schism.

Here's my view, I think it's pride... the Orthodox bishops are under some spirit of pride much like the Protestants are.

"No lord, I will not serve..." It plagues us all. No one likes to be under authority.

Forgive me for the comparison, I'm not trying to insult you or the Orthodox church but I think the Orthodox hierarchy has this, it's our way or the highway, spirit to them, they want to be top dog, they want everything to be Eastern theology and spirituality and I don't buy the invention of a western rite, and they want total control and that is what I personally think it's about.

I'm probably wrong,but that's what I think. It's what my observations have been.

and I see no point to go back to antiquity to see what this one did and what that one did. Not to say that antiquity does not have its place, it does. We look to the past to see the continuity that is there.

But the Church is not going to be stagnant nor is the Holy Spirit going to go comatose after the 4th century.

We have grown, evolved, and developed insight because we can. The papacy doesn't have to be what it was 1200 years ago.

If we have been given the keys to the kingdom of heaven to bind and lose, and we have been promised the Holy Spirit will guide it through time and we have been promised that hell will never prevail... why does the Church or the papacy have to be stuck in time?

That is what giving the keys was for. The purpose, to take the Church through the ages. Infallibility is a gift to protect the Church through the ages, as it grows and develops to keep it free from error.

We as a human race, we aren't morons. We're fallen but not total Morons. We can develop our understanding of things that we first taught way back when.

Thekla · Apr 24, 2010

benedictaoo said:
But you can keep on believing that Eastern theology, because in essence, there isn't a real difference.

But I understand you believe there is, or there wouldn't be a schism.

Here's my view, I think it's pride... the Orthodox bishops are under some spirit of pride much like the Protestants are.

"No lord, I will not serve..." It plagues us all. No one likes to be under authority.

Forgive me for the comparison, I'm not trying to insult you or the Orthodox church but I think the Orthodox hierarchy has this, it's our way or the highway, spirit to them, they want to be top dog, they want everything to be Eastern theology and spirituality and I don't buy the invention of a western rite, and they want total control and that is what I personally think it's about.

I'm probably wrong,but that's what I think. It's what my observations have been.

and I see no point to go back to antiquity to see what this one did and what that one did. Not to say that antiquity does not have its place, it does. We look to the past to see the continuity that is there.

But the Church is not going to be stagnant nor is the Holy Spirit going to go comatose after the 4th century.

We have grow, evolved, and developed insight because we can. The papacy doesn't have to be what it was 1200 years ago.

If we have been given the keys to the kingdom of heaven to bind and lose, and we have been promised the Holy Spirit will guide it through time and we have been promised that hell will never prevail... why does the Church or the papacy have to be stuck in time?

That is what giving the keys was for. The purpose, to take the Church through the ages. Infallibility is a gift to protect the Church through the ages, as it grows and develops to keep it free from error.

We as a human race, we aren't morons. We're fallen but not total Morons. We can develop our understanding of things that we first taught way back when.

There is too much here to respond to, and I don't know the line between apologetics and debate.

Thank-you for sharing your views.

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Aeyamar said:
Okay, I think I already countered the claim that the "two lungs" refer exclusively to rites within the Catholic church pages ago. That interpretation is wrong. And the worst part about this is our Orthodox guests on the thread might take your word for it and believe what you say. I'll just link to my previous post so I don't have to restate why:

I read it and it refers to two lungs inside one body. The Orthodox is supposed to be inside the body. They are part of the other lung, but they removed themselves and put themselves on life support.

They don't like it when we say they are the left lung. they do not consider us the right lung. They don't consider us at all.

The Church to them is THEM. They are whole and complete as they are. They have two left lungs... they don't need or want a right

Thekla · Apr 24, 2010

I did want to add, that it is not antiquity that is "looked back to", but an analysis occurs to determine the implications of a teaching both forward and back - to see if it is in accord to the truth, to the faith once delivered as a revelation by the Godman Jesus Christ.

glory be to Him +

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Aeyamar,

weren't you 18 just a couple of weeks ago?

benedictaoo · Apr 24, 2010

Thekla said:
I did want to add, that it is not antiquity that is "looked back to", but an analysis occurs to determine the implications of a teaching both forward and back - to see if it is in accord to the truth, to the faith once delivered as a revelation by the Godman Jesus Christ.

glory be to Him +

and nothing in Catholicism contradicts.

Why are the Orthodox being taught this? [Moved from OBOB]

Well-Known Member

Love never fails

Thekla

Guest

Legend

Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Thekla

Guest

Legend

Thekla

Guest

Legend

Legend

Thekla

Guest

Ecumenist

Legend

Thekla

Guest

Legend

Thekla

Guest

Legend

Legend

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency