Closed (invisible) Thread

[PapaHilarious]

Apotheoun,

I see from this thread once again that your entire existence on this forum seems to be to cause disunity and mock your brothers and sisters of the Western tradition. When you're not calling the West [i]heretics[/i], you're saying the Magisterium and Pope desire to make slaves out of Eastern bishops (that's from the Veiling thread, if you don't recall).

Every debate you engage in ends with the same conclusion: the West must always abandon its position and adopt that of the East. It's getting [i]very[/i] tiring. If you truly do not desire to belong to One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church united under the Pontiff of Rome, then you should be calling yourself Orthodox. At least the Orthodox I've known have practiced charity and respect.

From some of your previous rants, I know you feel a sort of betrayal because of the past treatment of Eastern Rite American bishops. Is this tragedy how you justify your constant rudeness and complete disregard for the feelings of those that don't agree with you?

St. Cyprian said in [i]On the Unity of the Church[/i]: [quote]"God is one and Christ is one, and one is His Church, and the faith is one, and His people welded together by the glue of concord into a solid unity of body. Unity cannot be rent asunder, nor can the one body of the Church, through the division of its structure, be divided into separate pieces."[/quote]

As a brother in Christ, I worry about you, Apotheoun. Have you truly lost yourself so far in debating as to forget Christ's call to gather others to Him? True unity has no place for arrogance and condescension. Rather, it requires great submission. Mary showed us by her fiat, Joseph by his humility, and Christ by accepting the Divine Will over His human desires.

And they were all Eastern.

[Anomaly]

This thread demonstrates the problems when groups of people believe that they are divinely 'Right' way beyond what is needed to know God and know Salvation.

Lot's of non-Catholics bash Catholics because they teach some things are 'a Mystery'. Some things are. In my opinion, the Filoque should have been left as part of the 'Mystery' and defined only as far theories worthy of belief. Splitting the Church and helping the Schism to exist over such a nuanced speculation? Now that's productive. This is why the Roman Catholic Church developed their 'Papal Infallibility' from Papal Primacy, to Papal Supremacy. It helps quash disagreement, even if it's disagreement that shouldn't have become decisive.

[N/A Gone]

Take it back!!!


I specifically, by name. Numerous times asked for Apotheoun to help me with this. I value his insight, his education and his passion. If I could lock this thread for a handful of people so I can sort some thoughts out I would. But please, do not insult Apotheoun for the work he has put in here. I have asked him a question and he has made responses. Thats how dialogue works. I am in the middle/end of writing a year long project on the filioque and Apotheoun's words have been more than valuable as a way for me to test my progession and concepts against and with an eastern mind.

I have never heard Apotheoun make the claims that I see you making now. I consider that very disrespectful and would prefer you leave this thread unless you have something of value to add to the discussion. Part of the issue with east/west in this matter is that every attempt at a productive dialogue breaks down into mudslinging like has happened here.

I am sorry Todd. If you would rather continue this in email I understand. I am going to read over your words some more before I respond. Let me know If you want to continue here or not.

Edited September 17, 2007 by Revprodeji

[PapaHilarious]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1386974' date='Sep 17 2007, 07:21 AM']I have never heard Apotheoun make the claims that I see you making now. I consider that very disrespectful and would prefer you leave this thread unless you have something of value to add to the discussion. Part of the issue with east/west in this matter is that every attempt at a productive dialogue breaks down into mudslinging like has happened here.[/quote]

To quote the numerous times your friend has called Western theology heretical in this thread alone would be pointless. You can scroll back for yourself. As for the other quote I mentioned, which is simply a drop of rainwater in a very large bucket, you can go to the "Question on Women Veiling" thread and read all about how the Pope and Magisterium want the East to "grovel at their feet like slaves."

Something you need to understand, Rev, is that this is a [u]public[/u] board. And people like Apotheoun purposely post arrogant and inflammatory remarks - you used a good word: "mudslinging" - with the knowledge that other Catholics will read and be offended.

The East/West dialogue is extremely important, as emphasized in Vatican II, and that is precisely why those like Apotheoun should keep their mocking and attempts at disunity to themselves. If you're counting on him as a mentor, Rev, you would be wise to find someone who does not disguise Orthodox views as Eastern Rite.

Eastern Rite Catholics are in union with Rome and, just as there is submission in marriage through charitable love, all Catholics - East and West - submit to the authority of the Pope. As has been pointed out to Apotheoun numerous times, there would otherwise be no "communion" with Rome. Your friend's positions are plain and simple [i]Orthodox[/i] Christianity. The paradox is, however, why does someone who claims to be Eastern Rite Catholic and firmly believes many universally-declared doctrines to be heretical want to be "in communion" with heretics? You should think long and hard about such hypocrisy.

And all this, mind you, is beside the glaring and most obvious point that your friend has never once apologized for his constant offenses. This would imply some humility, I suppose. Perhaps even some humanity. Charity, certainly. His attitude and any of those who post with similarly hostile - or as your friend once said: "unpopular" - remarks is embarrassing to not just Eastern Rite Catholics, but Orthodox, Protestant, and all who call themselves Christians.

A true Christian seeks to correct those in error, to lead them with love, and to avoid strife and discord. I'll leave you with the words of a great Eastern saint, Maximus the Confessor (from [i]Patrologia Graeca, Vol. XCI[/i]), responding to those who argue without charity:

[size=4][quote]"Any other spirit, even in the face of real heresy, leads the would-be zealot to something as bad as heresy itself. That is, the betrayal of the prime Christian commandment of love."[/quote][/size]

[Apotheoun]

Clearly, this is a Latin Catholic forum, and that is why I resigned as a Phatmass "Church Scholar" back in May 2006, and why I recently asked that I be removed from the "Church Militant" group, and be placed instead in the "Phatmasser" group.

That said, I have called no one a heretic in this or any other thread at Phatmass, but what I have done is say that Eastern Catholics cannot accept Latin doctrinal formulations into our own tradition, because to do so would cause innumerable theological difficulties, and within our own tradition, it would cause heresies, because we have a different understanding of the central doctrines of the faith (e.g., the Trinity, the Incarnation, divine simplicity, the nature of grace, predestination, justification, original sin, etc.).

Now, in spite of these differences, some Latin Catholics like to say that Eastern Catholics are "united [i]under[/i] the Pontiff of Rome" or that Eastern Catholics must "[i]submit[/i] to the authority of the Pope," but these statements are false, because they fail to take into account the patristic ecclesiology of communion, which sees each particular Church as the full realization of the one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, through the profession of the Orthodox faith and the celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy. Now, taking into account the patristic doctrine that all Churches -- and by extension all bishops -- are equal, it follows that the Pope and the Eastern Patriarchs have equal authority within the Church, because they all possess one and the same sacrament (i.e., consecration to Episcopacy); and moreover, this doctrine has been publicly affirmed by the Melkite Catholic Patriarch at the Synod of Bishops, for as he explained:

"With all respect due to the Petrine ministry, [b]the Patriarchal ministry is equal to it, 'servatis servandis,' in Eastern ecclesiology[/b]. [And] until this is taken into consideration by the Roman ecclesiology, no progress will be made in ecumenical dialogue" [Melkite Catholic Patriarch Gregory III Laham, "[url="http://www.vatican.va/news_services/press/sinodo/documents/bollettino_20_x-ordinaria-2001/02_inglese/b10_02.html"]Holy See Press Office: Synodus Episcoporum Bulletin of the Commission for Information of the 10th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops - 30 September / 27 October 2001[/url]"]

Clearly, taking into account what the Melkite Catholic Patriarch has said, Eastern Catholics reject the idea that the Patriarchs of the East are [i]under[/i] the Pope, or that they are in [i]submission[/i] to him; instead, Eastern Catholics affirm that our Patriarchs are in communion with the Pope as his equals. In fact, as I have already explained, every Church is equal to every other Church, and so no Church or bishop is [i]under[/i] any other Church or bishop, and that is why the Melkite Catholic Patriarch recently said in an interview that: "I am [i]cum Petro[/i] but not [i]sub Petro[/i]. If I were [i]sub Petro[/i], I would be in submission, and I couldn’t have a true frank, sincere, strong and free communion with the Pope. When you embrace a friend, you are not “below”. You embrace him from the same height, if not it wouldn’t be a true embrace" [30 Days Magazine, [i]October 2005[/i]].

God bless,
Todd

Edited September 17, 2007 by Apotheoun

[N/A Gone]

PapaHilarious

[quote]To quote the numerous times your friend has called Western theology heretical in this thread alone would be pointless. You can scroll back for yourself. As for the other quote I mentioned, which is simply a drop of rainwater in a very large bucket, you can go to the "Question on Women Veiling" thread and read all about how the Pope and Magisterium want the East to "grovel at their feet like slaves."[/quote]

I have not partaken in the veil debate, but in my extensive experience with Apotheun he has never called someone heretical. He has told me, and given examples of where a western theology does not reconcile itself with an eastern theology. Which is what I want. I want him to take my view and tear it up. Look earlier in this thread. That is what I want, and that is what he is providing. He knows eastern theology, he is willing to discuss this with me as well. He does not just say it is heretical and move on. He cites it and discusses it with me. That is my experience with Todd and I have a great respect for him.

The eccesiological issue of some western people who think that the east should be submissive and almost borg-like is wrong. The east has their own traditions, saints and practices. That is why seperating what is dogmatic and what is a viable non-heretical theological option is important. Many western theologians have an assimulation mentality and that is very wrong.


[quote]Something you need to understand, Rev, is that this is a [u]public[/u] board. And people like Apotheoun purposely post arrogant and inflammatory remarks - you used a good word: "mudslinging" - with the knowledge that other Catholics will read and be offended.[/quote]

actually, the dialogue was fruitful until you came in here sir. No offense. Apotheoun did not mudsling me once. He has always been patient with me and working with this theology with me. He has not made an arrogant or inflammatory remark on this thread. If you feel he has could you cite it? Remembering that I made a plea to him to tear up my writings.



[quote]The East/West dialogue is extremely important, as emphasized in Vatican II, and that is precisely why those like Apotheoun should keep their mocking and attempts at disunity to themselves. If you're counting on him as a mentor, Rev, you would be wise to find someone who does not disguise Orthodox views as Eastern Rite.[/quote]

I think that Apotheoun makes the mistake of only understanding the filioque with the scholastic teaching, rather than the patristic foundations and the openess of interpretation. But I do not feel Apotheoun has mocked me, nor do I feel he is making an attempt ad disunity. If you disagree, can you cite it in this thread? Also, could you give me your background in which you can judge eastern theology when Apotheoun has a Masters and it is his faith? I cross reference and cite when he writes things. He is credible.

[quote]Eastern Rite Catholics are in union with Rome and, just as there is submission in marriage through charitable love, all Catholics - East and West - submit to the authority of the Pope. As has been pointed out to Apotheoun numerous times, there would otherwise be no "communion" with Rome. Your friend's positions are plain and simple [i]Orthodox[/i] Christianity. The paradox is, however, why does someone who claims to be Eastern Rite Catholic and firmly believes many universally-declared doctrines to be heretical want to be "in communion" with heretics? You should think long and hard about such hypocrisy.[/quote]

The nature of that submission I feel is misunderstood by you sir. The eastern churches have their own liturgy, they have their own theological history and saints. It is a unity that allows them to have their history and the value of that. You bring up the hypocrisy here, but I think there are some misunderstandings. Todd has addressed the issues I have asked and he continues to address those issues such as florence. If I felt he was wrong I would not be talking with him about this.

[quote]And all this, mind you, is beside the glaring and most obvious point that your friend has never once apologized for his constant offenses. This would imply some humility, I suppose. Perhaps even some humanity. Charity, certainly. His attitude and any of those who post with similarly hostile - or as your friend once said: "unpopular" - remarks is embarrassing to not just Eastern Rite Catholics, but Orthodox, Protestant, and all who call themselves Christians.[/quote]

There has been no constant offenses. I have not considered this offensive in anyway. I do not understand why you are judging him so heavy. No offense sir, Im a big boy with patristic theology. I can handle my own and I appreciate the convo I was having with Todd before you started judging him so strong.

Part of unity is a willingness to talk about the tough issues and work through them. We should not gloss them over, or be afraid to mention pains.


'Apotheoun'


[quote]Clearly, this is a Latin Catholic forum, and that is why I resigned as a Phatmass "Church Scholar" back in May 2006, and why I recently asked that I be removed from the "Church Militant" group, and be placed instead in the "Phatmasser" group.[/quote]

Eastern rite is part of the church and I feel you should still be a militant. You are good about disclaiming yourself as eastern if people ask, but I have never had a problem with your posts.

[quote]That said, I have called no one a heretic in this or any other thread at Phatmass, but what I have done is say that Eastern Catholics cannot accept Latin doctrinal formulations into our own tradition, because to do so would cause innumerable theological difficulties, and within our own tradition, it would cause heresies, because we have a different understanding of the central doctrines of the faith (e.g., the Trinity, the Incarnation, divine simplicity, the nature of grace, predestination, justification, original sin, etc.).[/quote]

I did not know we had those issues not in common. Anychance you can give a quick example of those differences?

[quote]Now, in spite of these differences, some Latin Catholics like to say that Eastern Catholics are "united [i]under[/i] the Pontiff of Rome" or that Eastern Catholics must "[i]submit[/i] to the authority of the Pope," but these statements are false, because they fail to take into account the patristic ecclesiology of communion, which sees each particular Church as the full realization of the one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, through the profession of the Orthodox faith and the celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy. [b]Now, taking into account the patristic doctrine that all Churches -- and by extension all bishops -- are equal, it follows that the Pope and the Eastern Patriarchs have equal authority within the Church[/b][u][/u], because they all possess one and the same sacrament (i.e., consecration to Episcopacy); and moreover, this doctrine has been publicly affirmed by the Melkite Catholic Patriarch at the Synod of Bishops, for as he explained:[/quote]

Is that the teaching of first among many?

Todd, do you want to continue here with our discussion or move it to email?

[PapaHilarious]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1387033' date='Sep 17 2007, 09:52 AM']Clearly, taking into account what the Melkite Catholic Patriarch has said, Eastern Catholics reject the idea that the Patriarchs of the East are [i]under[/i] the Pope, or that they are in [i]submission[/i] to him; instead, Eastern Catholics affirm that their Patriarchs are in communion with the Pope as his equals. In fact, as I have already explained, every Church is equal to every other Church, and so no Church or bishop is [i]under[/i] any other Church or bishop, and that is why the Melkite Catholic Patriarch recently said in an interview that: "I am [i]cum Petro[/i] but not [i]sub Petro[/i]. If I were [i]sub Petro[/i], I would be in submission, and I couldn’t have a true frank, sincere, strong and free communion with the Pope. When you embrace a friend, you are not “below”. You embrace him from the same height, if not it wouldn’t be a true embrace" [30 Days Magazine, [i]October 2005[/i]].[/quote]

I see you once again ignore every reference to charity, most notably the beloved St. Maximus. Very well...

Why you think quoting a Melkite bishop from 2001 proves any case for you is a great mystery indeed. If bishops are all equal, then there would be some great difficulty explaining the pronouncements of all the Bishops of Rome for 2,000 years. Not even going back that far, how would such a position stand up against the universal proclamations of even the current Bishop of Rome, Benedict XVI? The bishops at Vatican II said many things about Eastern/Western dialogue that you reject, as well. But aren't they equal to a Melkite bishop?

If all bishops have equal authority, then your Melkite bishop has no more authority than the Bishop of Rome, who strongly disagrees with you on this matter, and therefore someone must be wrong. You said a friend embraces another as equal. SO TRUE! It is only Christ, or his Vicar on earth, that we greet as authority.

One of your citations about Western thought being heresy is on page 5 of this thread. Here's another example of the condescending language you've used in this particular thread, to save the trouble of flipping the page:

[quote][size=3]"the East rejects the pagan philosophical theology of the Western Church"[/size][/quote]

Is this what you see as true faith? Belittling and antagonizing other Christians? You can play whatever word-games you want as for how you [i]are[/i] or [i]are not[/i] in communion with other Catholics, but your actions and attitude speak volumes.

A follower of Christ, by any name he chooses, is one who follows the awesome and humbling love that Jesus showed for all...even when He was himself persecuted. Christ, after all, prayed for the very men who struck the nails into his hands and feet.

My brother, is this the love you have for other Catholics? Is your desire to be One so strong that you can forgive and love [u]all[/u] even in the face of disagreement? Why do you refuse to show charity for your brothers? Maybe some in here have wronged you, I cannot speak for others. But malice is never justified, and all you do by your divisive tone is drive a wedge between your brothers and sisters in Christ.

If you are on this forum to win arguments, you will at times prevail. You are a very well-read and learned man, after all. But if you are on here to win souls, you have failed greatly, my friend. Consider once again the words of those followers of Christ who have gone before:

[size=4][quote]"Any other spirit, even in the face of real heresy, leads the would-be zealot to something as bad as heresy itself. That is, the betrayal of the prime Christian commandment of love."[/quote][/size]

[PapaHilarious]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1387051' date='Sep 17 2007, 10:32 AM']Stating the truth unequivocally is charitable.[/quote]

Saint Maximus disagrees with you. As does St. Paul. I'm sure you read some of his discourses on charity previously. And [i]truth[/i]? It is never calling your brother's tradition pagan, heretical, or equivocal to being a slave-master.

[size=4][quote]"Any other spirit, even in the face of real heresy, leads the would-be zealot to something as bad as heresy itself. That is, the betrayal of the prime Christian commandment of love."[/quote][/size]

[PapaHilarious]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1387054' date='Sep 17 2007, 10:35 AM']Perhaps it should be moved to email, because I doubt that the conversation will be able to progress in this thread.

God bless,
Todd[/quote]


Indeed. This suggestion was made previously, since this is a public forum and should have no tolerance for the mocking of others' traditions.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='PapaHilarious' post='1387059' date='Sep 17 2007, 10:40 AM']Saint Maximus disagrees with you. As does St. Paul. I'm sure you read some of his discourses on charity previously. And [i]truth[/i]? It is never calling your brother's tradition pagan, heretical, or equivocal to being a slave-master.[/quote]
We are not going to agree. I am not a Latin, and so I do not subscribe to the Aristotelian theology of the Scholastics.

To state the truth is to be charitable, because surely you do not believe that charity involves lying.

Edited September 17, 2007 by Apotheoun

[PapaHilarious]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1387064' date='Sep 17 2007, 10:44 AM']We are not going to agree. I am not a Latin, and so I do not subscribe to the Aristotelian theology of the Scholastics.

To state the truth is to be charitable, and surely you do not believe it is better to lie.[/quote]


The Pope has never once asked Eastern bishops to "grovel at his feet like slaves," so perhaps you should examine who the liar is in this equation. As for the heresy conversation, I have a good friend who said wonderful things on the topic:
[size=4]
[quote]"Any other spirit, even in the face of real heresy, leads the would-be zealot to something as bad as heresy itself. That is, the betrayal of the prime Christian commandment of love."[/quote][/size]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='PapaHilarious' post='1387065' date='Sep 17 2007, 10:47 AM']The Pope has never once asked Eastern bishops to "grovel at his feet like slaves," so perhaps you should examine who the liar is in this equation.[/quote]
The popes of the last century did not, but that is not true historically speaking. Pope Eugene wanted Patriarch Joseph to kiss his feet at the Council of Florence, but -- happily -- things have changed for the better since that time.

As far as the "pagan" philosophy comment is concerned, the East long ago rejected Aristotelian philosophy in theology, while the West embraced it wholeheartedly. That said, as an Eastern Catholic I do not consider Aristotle to be a Christian, nor a Father, and so his philosophical views are irrelevant to me theologically speaking.

[PapaHilarious]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1387068' date='Sep 17 2007, 10:50 AM']I addressed the slave master issue in my previous post. In context it is an accurate eccesiological concern.[/quote]

Comparing the authority of the Holy Father to inhumane, racial subjugation is egregious in the extreme. Shame on you for suggesting otherwise. Your acceptance of such a comparison not only mocks the Church but every African-American or other human being that has born the yoke of slavery.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1387071' date='Sep 17 2007, 10:53 AM']Sorry Todd, could you cite the "aristotelian theology of the Scholastics" it sounds like a loaded term and I would like the specifics.[/quote]
The Eastern Churches -- in the [i]Synodikon of Orthodoxy[/i] -- rejected the use of both Platonic and Aristotelian metaphysics in theology, because neither of these pagan systems can transcend the [i]diastema[/i] and penetrate into the mystery of God.

[N/A Gone]

It was an analogy. Dont stretch it beyond what it was intended. Losing free will, losing your theological tradition that finds itself in the patristic time, losing your whole identity in a false unity is something that is understood in that analogy. Of couse stretching the analogy does not help it or your case.

Please dont bust out the race card. You dont know me. That was not needed and did not make sense. Analogies help us understand a point, but any analogy can be brought to a point where it makes no sense.