Should We Proselytize the Eastern Orthodox?

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='PedroX' date='Apr 16 2004, 12:04 PM'] B.B.,

Its probably not worth adding this, but I feel the need to clarify a few things.

[/quote]
Hi Pedro,

Okay.

[quote]One, I never even suggested that the Pope was commanding us to sin.  Largely, because the Pope did not write the B. Document.  An office of the Curia did so.  While it is certainly to be respected, and even given assent to, it is not a "command from the Pope".[/quote]

Yeah, but my point is that if there's anyone to trust on this issue, it'd be the Pope. It's not like his views on this are totally illogical. I think proselytism would be counterproductive. Honey rather than vinegar, you know? We really [i]should[/i] follow the Pope's lead on this out of obedience.

[quote]Secondly, the article you linked to clearly states that it took 3+ years for the Orthodox to "accept" our apology.  I feel that the Pope was right to apologize for those sins, but 3 years?  Comeone thats not headway.[/quote]

In the grand scheme of things, three years really isn't a very long time. I like that the Pope is being the bigger person and apologizing for mistakes made by Catholics in the past. I think there has indeed been headway with the Orthodox. I've read that the mutual excommunications were lifted in the 60s. Not only that, but the Pope and an Eastern Orthodox Patriarch concelebrated the Mass (or was it the Divine Liturgy?) together not too long ago. (The Patriarch left the alter before the Liturgy of the Eucharist.) The fact that they accepted that apology [i]at all[/i] is headway.

God bless,

Jennifer

Edited May 2, 2004 by BeenaBobba

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Apr 16 2004, 12:15 PM'] Dr. Carroll is an historian. He has no theological qualifications whatsoever, as he has himself stated. His opinion in this is just that: an opinion.

[/quote]
That really wasn't my point at all. I know that he's a historian and not a theologian. I mentioned him because he is known for his orthodoxy.

[quote]The Balamand agreement goes much farther than merely saying that we are not bound to try to convert every person we come upon.  The agreement implicitly denies the necessity of the Church for salvation by charging Catholics to refrain from evangelizing the Orthodox.  [/quote]

Frankly, I think you're reading too much out of it. I have a few Eastern Orthodox friends, and I don't deliberately try to convert them. But we [i]do[/i] talk about theology, and our differences [i]are[/i] brought up. Of course, I always defend the Church. While this is not proselytism, it is still making the case for Catholicism. How my friends are affected by this I don't know -- nor do I try to guess. I leave that between them and God.

[quote]It is not simply stating that Catholics are not bound to try to convert them, but rather, that they should not.[/quote]

Same difference! Since we're not bound to convert everyone we come across, how is refraining from proselytism any different from this? We're not [i]bound[/i] to proselytize everyone we come across. The Balamand just went a step further and applied this to a group of Christians for the [b]greater good[/b] of reunion and Catholicism.

[quote]The goal of bringing the entire orthodox church back into Communion with Rome is nowhere explicity stated and in fact, is played down.  [/quote]

I disagree. If it's not contained in the document itself, the actions of Pope John Paul II have made this evident. One just needs to put two and two together. I mean, really! Why else would the Pope support this if not to make for a hastier reunion?

[quote]The fact of the matter remains:  we are commanded to go forth and preach the Gospel to ALL Nations.  [/quote]

How can you interpret the Bible without Rome?

[quote]There is only One True Church outside of which there is no salvation and it certainly is not Eastern Orthodoxy.  [/quote]

Schismatic Traditionalists argue that this means that one [i]must[/i] be an official member of the Catholic Church to be saved. Vatican II clarified this to mean that even those outside of the official Catholic Church (while being mystically connected to it) [i]can possibly[/i] be saved; however, salvation is not possible for those who know the Church is true and reject it -- and those who suspect it is but fail to study.

The Eastern Orthodox Church has valid Sacraments and apostolic succession. Obviously, they're not too far from the Catholic Church. If the Orthodox Church was completely severed from the Catholic Church, don't you think it'd cease to have valid Sacraments?

[quote]To say that we should not try to convert them is dangerously close to saying that they do not need to be converted.[/quote]

Not at all. Remember: the goal of the Balamand Agreement is to bring the Orthodox back into communion with the Catholic Church. How is having the goal of bringing the entire Orthodox Church back into communion similar to saying that the Orthodox should stay separate from the Catholic Church? It's ridiculous! (No personal offense by that, btw.)

Jennifer

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='Pope Saint Pius V' date='Apr 16 2004, 08:28 PM'] Furthermore, as to the Holy Father merely enacting Christian charity, please don't take this the wrong way but it was absolutely pointless. We're apologizing to people for an act that occured centuries ago that we didn't commit and that they didn't suffer. Realistically, it is nothing more than an ecumenical gesture but one, which as you pointed out, has had absolutely no effect. In fact, it makes the Church appear weak in front of Her Enemies. [/quote]
Since when is humility weakness?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='PhatPhred' post='153244' date='Apr 2 2004, 07:59 AM']I thought that Eastern Rite Catholics omit the "filioque" from their recitation of the creed in the Divine Ligurgy.[/quote]
Yes, it is omitted when the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed is chanted in Eastern Catholic Churches.

[Resurrexi]

We should certainly proselytize the Eastern Orthodox. They are in heresy and schism.

[jeffpugh]

Wow, Apo. You quote something from page one whilst all the action is on page 4+. I'd like to hear your comments on this ancient debate

[Apotheoun]

I am opposed to Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics proselytizing Eastern Orthodox Christians, just as I am opposed to Eastern Orthodox trying to convert Catholics (Roman and Byzantine) to Orthodoxy.

I think that dialogue between the ancient Apostolic Churches of the East and the Catholic Church should be the means used for restoring communion between the whole of the East and West.

[princessgianna]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1839850' date='Apr 18 2009, 06:51 PM']I am opposed to Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics proselytizing Eastern Orthodox Christians, just as I am opposed to Eastern Orthodox trying to convert Catholics (Roman and Byzantine) to Orthodoxy.

I think that dialogue between the ancient Apostolic Churches of the East and the Catholic Church should be the means used for restoring communion between the whole of the East and West.[/quote]
AGREED!!!!

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1839850' date='Apr 18 2009, 07:51 PM']I am opposed to Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics proselytizing Eastern Orthodox Christians, just as I am opposed to Eastern Orthodox trying to convert Catholics (Roman and Byzantine) to Orthodoxy.

I think that dialogue between the ancient Apostolic Churches of the East and the Catholic Church should be the means used for restoring communion between the whole of the East and West.[/quote]

Is not the salvation of those individual souls in heresy in schism important? I am personally opposed, by the way, to Eastern Orthodox Christians converting to Latin Catholicism if there is a possibility for them to become Eastern Catholic instead.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1840090' date='Apr 18 2009, 09:08 PM']Is not the salvation of those individual souls in heresy in schism important? I am personally opposed, by the way, to Eastern Orthodox Christians converting to Latin Catholicism if there is a possibility for them to become Eastern Catholic instead.[/quote]
Although clearly an Eastern Orthodox Christian is free to join an Eastern Catholic Church whenever he may so desire, Rome itself has moved away from any attempt to reestablish communion with the Orthodox Churches in a piecemeal fashion, and that is why the bishop of Rome has entered into a process of dialogue with the autocephalous Eastern Churches in order to bring about corporate reunion.

[Resurrexi]

I think that we've been working towards both single conversions and a complete reunion since the schism began.

Edited April 19, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Apotheoun]

Rome rejected proselytism of individual Orthodox Christians in the Balamand Agreement (1993). The Church of Rome now seeks corporate reunion with all the Eastern Orthodox Churches as the sole means for restoring Christian unity, and as a part of this changed perspectives she has also recognized the rights of canonical territory of the various autocephalous Byzantine and Oriental Churches.

[Resurrexi]

I would assume that the Balamand Agreement is one of those documents with no magisterial authority, much like the Ravenna Document. Thus, we no religious submission to it, and are completely free to disagree with it or even say that in agreeing not to proselytize the Eastern Othodox, a grave and pernicious error was made.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1839850' date='Apr 18 2009, 07:51 PM']I am opposed to Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics proselytizing Eastern Orthodox Christians, just as I am opposed to Eastern Orthodox trying to convert Catholics (Roman and Byzantine) to Orthodoxy.

I think that dialogue between the ancient Apostolic Churches of the East and the Catholic Church should be the means used for restoring communion between the whole of the East and West.[/quote]
Okay. I wondered if the EOC tried to proselytize(Latin) Catholics. I always wondered on what grounds How do they win converts? They claim that east is more valid than the west?

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1840281' date='Apr 19 2009, 04:31 AM']I would assume that the Balamand Agreement is one of those documents with no magisterial authority, much like the Ravenna Document. Thus, we no religious submission to it, and are completely free to disagree with it or even say that in agreeing not to proselytize the Eastern Othodox, a grave and pernicious error was made.[/quote]
So what you're saying is, sorta, "cop out on our word?" what scandal!

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1840565' date='Apr 19 2009, 02:20 PM']Okay. I wondered if the EOC tried to proselytize(Latin) Catholics. I always wondered on what grounds How do they win converts? They claim that east is more valid than the west?[/quote]
I am sure that there are Eastern Orthodox Christians who try to convert Roman Catholics (and Eastern Catholics) to Orthodoxy, just as there Roman Catholics -- like Resurrexi -- who try to convert Orthodox to Catholicism, but the Roman Church itself has rejected proselytism of individuals in favor of restoring communion at the corporate (ecclesial) level.