Catholic - Orthodox Dialog

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1264989' date='May 5 2007, 11:31 AM']Here's the facts: I don't have time to go through every quote, in which you quoted without even checking the full context yourself! It's very easy to "copy and paste" 10 billion quotes from the internet, it's more difficult to fiind the actual articles and read them directly. If you'd like to specifically focus on a particular article by a particular saint [as has previously been done in this discussion] you're more then welcome to, but just copy and pasting articles from the internet and then expecting me to spend hrs researching the context, just to prove you wrong, isn't going to work for me.

I don't use them for my advantage, you quoted them. I quoted St. Athansius and St. Gregory![/quote]

That's fine. I suppose this is not a discussion for me at this time then. These statements that I am supplying convince me of the early church's belief in the primacy of Peter and of his jurisdiction over all of the Church. The fact is, I believe these simple quotes are all the defense necessary to show the primacy of Peter and his universal jurisdiction. If you won't address them, then there is no point in me going any further. I have looked at the context. I've read most (if not all) of the content of the documents involved. I simply see no contrary context, and you won't explain it to me. If you don't wish to defend your position to me, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and while for some this might seem to be a reasonable conclusion to a discussion between two people it accomplishes absolutely nothing. But I respect your wish to apply your own methods and I will continue to read the thread as you continue with the others. Thanks for your time, peace.

Edited May 5, 2007 by goldenchild17

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1264993' date='May 5 2007, 09:38 AM']That's fine. I suppose this is not a discussion for me at this time then. These statements that I am supplying convince me of the early church's belief in the primacy of Peter and of his jurisdiction over all of the Church. The fact is, I believe these simple quotes are all the defense necessary to show the primacy of Peter and his universal jurisdiction. If you won't address them, then there is no point in me going any further. I have looked at the context. I've read most (if not all) of the content of the documents involved. I simply see no contrary context, and you won't explain it to me. If you don't wish to defend your position to me, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. peace.[/quote]

There's a huge difference between us discussing it, and you just posting quotes from various websites.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1264995' date='May 5 2007, 11:42 AM']There's a huge difference between us discussing it, and you just posting quotes from various websites. [/quote]

Not really. I'm asking questions and making statements about each piece, but if you don't wish to answer simple one line statements and/or questions then that's fine. Of course I'm posting quotes from the letters themselves as that is the content we are disputing. If you have a problem with posting the actual text then what is your solution? Long drawn out philosophical posts are not needed when a question about a text is sufficient. But I won't waste any more of your time.

btw, I narrowed my statements in question to 3 or 4. If you liken that to "10 billion" then I can only assume that you don't care enough about the topic to engage yourself in 3 to 4 simple ones. I'm sorry if I'm mistaken but that is certainly the impression I'm getting.

[goldenchild17]

btw, I'm simply doing what you asked:

[quote]"then post the select quotes that back your opinion best."[/quote]

I've already read the documents in question so I have read the context. Whether you think I understand the context is still a viable option. But you asked me to give you a couple that I think make a case. While I believe there are many, many more and many stronger ones, these I provided because I think they are sufficient. I don't know why you have changed your mind now, but this is what you asked me to do, and I complied. You don't have to answer them, but it's quite disrespectful to implicitly accuse me of foul play (through posting random quotes etc.) when that is exactly what you requested I do.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1265002' date='May 5 2007, 09:54 AM']btw, I'm simply doing what you asked:
I've already read the documents in question so I have read the context. Whether you think I understand the context is still a viable option. But you asked me to give you a couple that I think make a case. While I believe there are many, many more and many stronger ones, these I provided because I think they are sufficient. I don't know why you have changed your mind now, but this is what you asked me to do, and I complied. You don't have to answer them, but it's quite disrespectful to implicitly accuse me of foul play (through posting random quotes etc.) when that is exactly what you requested I do.[/quote]

Funny is that you admitted in a previous post to just getting them from the many so called "catholic appologetic" sites that you visit. Now you're saying that you got them from the actual articles.

[Katholikos]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1264865' date='May 5 2007, 03:33 AM']I'm glad someone knew for sure [because I didn't] the previous poster was correct that the Byzintines were the first to create a clone.[/quote]

When one Church is Catholic and the other is Orthodox, they are not identical and therefore one is not a clone of the other.

Likos

[Aloysius]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1265117' date='May 5 2007, 03:18 PM']Funny is that you admitted in a previous post to just getting them from the many so called "catholic appologetic" sites that you visit. Now you're saying that you got them from the actual articles. [/quote]
sounds to me like his claim is that he has, at one point in time, read these in their original context and now, in order to post them, he searched and found their best excerpts online. seems reasonable, only crazy people like me retype things out from their own books because they like the feel of books

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Katholikos' post='1265261' date='May 5 2007, 01:49 PM']When one Church is Catholic and the other is Orthodox, they are not identical and therefore one is not a clone of the other.

Likos[/quote]

It is a clone because it was established to "replace" the true See of St. Mark, as to act as a clone or immitation of the real See of St. Mark [which His Holiness Pope John Paul II acknowledged the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Coptic Orthodox Church to be the true See of St. Mark].

[Jnorm888]

GoldenChild, The Bishop of Rome is only seen as first among equals. So her primacy is only one of honor because both Peter and Paul died there. Rome never had the power to defrock other Patriarchs.

So the type of power you are thinking of didn't exist back then. The Bishop of Rome may hold that type of power now but only to those bishops who submit to her.

[Jnorm888]

GoldenChild, The Bishop of Rome is only seen as first among equals. So her primacy is only one of honor because both Peter and Paul died there. Rome never had the power to defrock other Patriarchs.

So the type of power you are thinking of didn't exist back then. The Bishop of Rome may hold that type of power now but only to those bishops who submit to her.

[Jnorm888]

Also that quote about passover and pope victor vs Polycarp.

From my readings Neither the Bishop of Ashia minor nor the Bishop of Rome would bend. For the Bishop of Ashia minor claimed that their tradition came from the Apostle John while the Bishop of Rome claimed that his tradition came from the Apostle Peter. However, the Bishop of Rome didn't get his way. Instead, they both had to agree to differ. It wasn't until the council of Nicea......I think.......I forgot which......but it wasn't until 2 hundred years later at that council that everybody was made to observe the same passover.......And that happened at a Church council that was dictated by an Emperor........not the Bishop of Rome!!!

Edited May 6, 2007 by jnorm888

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1265117' date='May 5 2007, 02:18 PM']Funny is that you admitted in a previous post to just getting them from the many so called "catholic appologetic" sites that you visit. Now you're saying that you got them from the actual articles. [/quote]

Of course. sorry if that didn't make sense. I have read these documents in question in the past. Due to my poor memory I am unable to memorize the contents of each document (not sure this is a damning attribute ) I looked on various sites to see what are some of the basic historical statements etc. that are used and then I went back to the documents to get the actual quotes and read a little deeper. It's a little bit quicker than going through all the historical documents that have ever been written. Not sure why this would be considered taboo...


But don't worry. Apparently my methods are too much for you to accept. I respect that and will just observe this thread from here on out.

Edited May 6, 2007 by goldenchild17

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1265562' date='May 5 2007, 09:20 PM']It is a clone because it was established to "replace" the true See of St. Mark, as to act as a clone or immitation of the real See of St. Mark [which His Holiness Pope John Paul II acknowledged the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Coptic Orthodox Church to be the true See of St. Mark].[/quote]This is no more true than claiming Pope Shenouda acknowledge's the primacy of the Roman Pontiff, because he signed a document which acknowledges the Pope Paul VI as "Pope of the Catholic Church."

I'd be interested in seeing your quote, though.

As things stand, the Eastern Orthodox reject the claim of Pope Shenouda III as sitting on the "true See of St. Mark." They have their own claimant.

In addition, the Catholic Church recognizes a claimant. Quoting the April 2006 letter from Pope Benedict XVI to His Beatitude Antonios Naguib Patriarch of Alexandria for Copts:[quote]With great joy I received the announcement of Your Beatitude's election to the Patriarchal See of Alexandria for Copts and your request for Ecclesiastical Communion.[/quote]This is just one recent statement from among many which could be used to disprove your assertion regarding what Pope John Paul II said.

Edited May 6, 2007 by Mateo el Feo

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='1266148' date='May 6 2007, 02:01 PM']This is no more true than claiming Pope Shenouda acknowledge's the primacy of the Roman Pontiff, because he signed a document which acknowledges the Pope Paul VI as "Pope of the Catholic Church."[/quote]

Through signing it, he didn't validate "the supremacy of Rome", rather he signed a document for peace and unity, despite the differences [which is why we're not in full communion]. As I'd mentioned in a previous post, there are documents from WWII that were signed between the Roman Catholic Church and Hitler's regime too, does it mean that they agreed with hitler's regime? No, it simply means that they agreed to the terms on that piece of paper as long as it didn't violate their own inner convictions.

[quote]As things stand, the Eastern Orthodox reject the claim of Pope Shenouda III as sitting on the "true See of St. Mark." They have their own claimant.[/quote]It's true that they have their own bishop, that they believe has a right to be in Alexandria, that's very true but they have acknowledged that their assumptions about Copts during/after Chalcedon were wrong, and shouldn't have gone down as it did. This is a central issue, that stands between a full communion because the Eastern Orthodox have had bishops in Alexandria for many years, and removing them would be a major step [apparently one that they don't want to take]. In regards to the part where you have quotes, I'm guessing that you're basing it upon something [a particular article] and I'd like to know what article that is, if you don't mind sharing.

[quote]In addition, the Catholic Church recognizes a claimant. Quoting the April 2006 letter from Pope Benedict XVI to His Beatitude Antonios Naguib Patriarch of Alexandria for Copts:This is just one recent statement from among many which could be used to disprove your assertion regarding what Pope John Paul II said.[/quote]

I guess we have two Roman Pope's that disagree. As His Holiness Pope John Paul II would NEVER EVER had given the Coptic Orthodox Church the ALL the remaining relics of St. Mark [that were taken during the crusades], if we weren't the true church that St. Mark had established and the true See of St. Mark, as His Holiness Pope Shenouda III resides.

[Mateo el Feo]

Reza,

I didn't see the papal quote you were referring to. Please let me know whether you were referring to a particular quote.

[quote name='Reza']It's true that they have their own bishop, that they believe has a right to be in Alexandria, that's very true but they have acknowledged that their assumptions about Copts during/after Chalcedon were wrong, and shouldn't have gone down as it did. This is a central issue, that stands between a full communion because the Eastern Orthodox have had bishops in Alexandria for many years, and removing them would be a major step [apparently one that they don't want to take]. In regards to the part where you have quotes, I'm guessing that you're basing it upon something [a particular article] and I'd like to know what article that is, if you don't mind sharing.[/quote]My quote is a taken directly from your post. It's not from any article. My claim is no more than you already have admitted, so I don't know what you would like me to prove.

The Eastern Orthodox Church includes a member church in their communion which claims the See of Alexandria for itself. Specifically, I'm referring to the Orthodox Church in Alexandria:
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Orthodox_Church_of_Alexandria"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Orthodo...h_of_Alexandria[/url]

Quoting the first paragraph:[quote]The Orthodox Church of Alexandria (Greek: Πατριαρχεῖο Ἀλεξανδρείας καὶ πάσης Ἀφρικῆς) is one of the autocephalous Eastern Orthodox Churches. Its head bishop is the Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa, who like the Coptic Orthodox Pope of Alexandria and the Coptic Catholic Patriarch of Alexandria, claims to have succeeded the Apostle Mark the Evangelist in the office of Bishop of Alexandria, who founded the Church in the 1st century, and therefore marked the beginning of Christianity in Africa. It is one of the five ancient patriarchates of the early Church, called the Pentarchy[/quote][quote name='Reza']I guess we have two Roman Pope's that disagree.[/quote]Are you suggesting that Pope Benedict's treatment of the Patriarch of the Coptic Catholic Church is any different from Pope Paul VI? That's quite a stretch of the imagination. Maybe just wishful thinking. Honestly, such flippant statements don't help you.

[quote name='Reza']As His Holiness Pope John Paul II would NEVER EVER had given the Coptic Orthodox Church the ALL the remaining relics of St. Mark [that were taken during the crusades], if we weren't the true church that St. Mark had established and the true See of St. Mark, as His Holiness Pope Shenouda III resides.[/quote]OK, this was Pope Paul VI, not Pope John Paul II. You ask why would he return these relics. For the sake of bringing those in schism back into communion with the Catholic Faith. Catholics have this hope that all Christianity will answer Our Lord's prayer to His Father ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/john/john17.htm#v11"]John 17:11[/url]), "that they may be one just as we are."

Quoting [i]Ut Unam Sint[/i]:[quote name='Ut Unam Sint']For the Catholic Church, then, the communion of Christians is none other than the manifestation in them of the grace by which God makes them sharers in his own communion, which is his eternal life. Christ's words "that they may be one" are thus his prayer to the Father that the Father's plan may be fully accomplished, in such a way that everyone may clearly see "what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things" (Eph 3:9). To believe in Christ means to desire unity; to desire unity means to desire the Church; to desire the Church means to desire the communion of grace which corresponds to the Father's plan from all eternity. Such is the meaning of Christ's prayer: "Ut unum sint".

In the present situation of the lack of unity among Christians and of the confident quest for full communion, the Catholic faithful are conscious of being deeply challenged by the Lord of the Church. The Second Vatican Council strengthened their commitment with a clear ecclesiological vision, open to all the ecclesial values present among other Christians. The Catholic faithful face the ecumenical question in a spirit of faith.

The Council states that the Church of Christ "subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him", and at the same time acknowledges that "many elements of sanctification and of truth can be found outside her visible structure. These elements, however, as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, possess an inner dynamism towards Catholic unity".

"It follows that these separated Churches and Communities, though we believe that they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and value in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".[/quote]Our Lord Himself motivates us to search for unity, to heal the wounds caused by schism. Christianity's divisions are a great scandal. I'll conclude with a quote from [url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/john/john13.htm#v34"]today's Gospel reading[/url]:[quote name='John 13:34-35']"I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."[/quote]At the risk of sounding like a hippy, we need to love one another.