Article

2005-09-06 International-UN-NGOs

Pope Seeks to Heal Orthodox, Catholic Rift

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2005-09-06 00:00|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [1727 views since 2007-05-07] Top

1 I wouldn't say "made worse", just that both sides have all of a sudden become engaged again, and tons of old disputes, disagreements, arguments, debates and paperwork are being dug up out of their respective archives.

Much of the fight, which was really cultural and political, has become moot, which leaves the only real argument outstanding: "Do we get more out of the deal by reunifying, or by remaining two distinct, but separate churches?"

Eventually the two will mostly likely decide to have their cake and eat it, too. That is, to form an elaborate and profitable entente, with great exchanges of archival materials and resources, permanent councils to discuss minutiae, travel and courtesy protocols, etc. Not really reunifying, and carefully defending their "turf", but closing the gap a lot.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-09-06 11:46|| 2005-09-06 11:46|| Front Page Top

2 I just wish that all Christian denominations would get it through their thick heads that they all work for the same boss ultimately. I'm sick of religous bickering especially in view of what we face today

Posted by Cheaderhead 2005-09-06 14:32|| 2005-09-06 14:32|| Front Page Top

3 Cheaderhead: a lot of it goes back to the very origins of Xtianity. Does God always speak through men directly, or primarily through those who lead very chaste and forthright lives? The former, "Gnostic" viewpoint has its arguments, but creates no lasting "church"; whereas the latter view survives as an institution over time.

Other schisms are cultural and political, but do not underestimate the value of these differences. A "one size fits all" religion just does not exist, and the New Testament neither demands one nor endorses it--and yet maybe it does. The Papacy in Rome claims descent from Peter himself, but what does that mean?

For all things there are reasons. Wishing things were otherwise may not guarantee a desired outcome.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-09-06 17:47|| 2005-09-06 17:47|| Front Page Top

4 Agreed, Anonymoose. The schism between Orthodox and Catholic was fairly early, with the Catholics working with bad translations from Greek to Latin (a great many of the early Churchmen were barely literate, even in their own tongue, being "of the people"), then accusing the Greek-speaking Orthodox of having changed the texts. Even before that there was the question of whether the Bishop of Rome had primacy over the other bishops, particularly of the Eastern Sees that had been established much earlier.

But the exercise will nontheless be helpful if approached openly and honestly by all parties. There has been a heavy accretion of history and doctrine over the last two millenia.

Posted by trailing wife 2005-09-06 22:00|| 2005-09-06 22:00|| Front Page Top

5 I wasn't thinking of a "One size fit's all" Christianity. I was more thinking about rather than the RC and the GO fighting or the Baptist preacher railing against Papists (OK maybe that's extreme) they all realize that they are trying to bring the Word to people in their own way and also realize that others are bringing in theirs

Posted by Cheaderhead 2005-09-06 22:02|| 2005-09-06 22:02|| Front Page Top

00:01 Jan
23:43 Jan
23:36 Glenmore
23:32 Jan
23:31 Red Dog
23:25 Alaska Paul
23:25 Jan
23:22 Valentine
23:21 Captain America
23:19 Jan
23:19 Chris W.
23:19 Alaska Paul
23:16 Glenmore
23:14 JosephMendiola
23:11 Brett
23:06 muck4doo
23:05 Frank G
23:04 Frank G
22:53 Phil Fraering
22:52 John Wayne Bobbitt
22:50 Penguin
22:50 JosephMendiola
22:48 Sherry
22:46 Matt K.
Merry-Go-Blog