> Also, these various dialogues debase Orthodoxy-which
> the Orthodox consider to be the True Church of Christ-as
> equal to the heterodox confessions of Roman
> Catholicism and Protestantism.

Why? Why do they not instead merely elevate the Roman Catholics?

> The Roman Catholics seem to attach some great
> importance to the “Primacy” of Constantinople, seeming
> to think if they can only convince Constantinople, then all
> Orthodox Churches will automatically swallow whatever
> it is that Rome wants them to swallow.

I seriously doubt that Rome is that naive. The average RC
priest, or penitent, steeped in the last few centuries of
“submit to what Rome says or else!” from their nuns, may
believe this. But the higher-ups know better than that.

> the Primacy as one of “honor” only.

Fair enough. But what does this mean IN PRACTICE? Often,
it seems, it means that Orthodoxy can agree on no new
issue, i.e. on no question that was not answered by any
of the Church Fathers. And our practice of virtually
completely ignoring the Latin Fathers is to our detriment,
IMHO.

> Any Orthodox Christian could only truly recognize the
> “Primacy of Rome” if Rome abandoned her heresies, and
> returned to Holy Orthodoxy.

> May Rome AND the Orthodox Churches soon abandon all
> this nonsense, which produces nothing but reams of
> paper and hot air, and seek only Holy Orthodoxy!

All well and good. But what does this mean? Which
heresies must Rome abandon? Filioque only? Immaculate
Conception and Vatican-I-style primacy and infallibility?
OK. Purgatory (I’m not sure that was ever “infallibly”
declared a dogma .) What about unleavened bread? Some
have declared this a “heresy” despite good evidence that
it was western Church practice at least as far back as the
middle of the first millenium, when there was no
(centuries-long) schism (there were shorter ones …), and
the Oecumenical Councils certainly did not complain of it
with respect to the Latins, only with respect to the
Armenians. Do you really think that those who are against
dialogue will accept this? Or will they find more heresies
for Rome to rescind before they are Really Really Orthodox?

As sad as I am about this conviction, I am nevertheless
convinced that many Orthodox, both lay and ordained,
_define_ their orthodoxy, in part, with non-communion
with, or frank opposition to, Rome. (The parallel to the
Nestorians and Monophysites, who accepted the heresies
partly so as to be against the Emperor’s church, is I think
a valid one.) A further example is how Orthodoxy has
ceased to be much of a proselytising church (among non-
Christians, I mean), again, as if one could not truly be
orthodox unless one simultaneously is Russian, or
Greek, or Serbian, or .

Father J I truly agree with you!

I would very much like to see references that support the assertion that Rome has in any way shape or form made declarations on these groups mired in, shall we say, canonical difficulty…

Can you offer us some citation or reference to where Rome has done as you claim?

Father J is a Per Christum (http://blog.ancient-future.net/) contributor…

Do stop by.

Simple

Probably not. Nor do they care about things like Ravenna. To them church is their European or Middle Eastern village church or Pennsylvanian industrial town parish – the bishop stops by once in a while like in a Roman Catholic parish – and the ordinary practice of religion there.

I bet most ordinary Orthodox (especially Cradles) would love to be reunited with their Catholic brethren.

Born Orthodox have got nothing to prove so most of them haven’t got Duracell batteries on their shoulders. Granted there’s nasty xenophobic stuff from ‘the old country’. But I think at worst there’s often the benign indifference I just described and at most something approaching what Diane says: ‘Oh, it’s so close – wonderful!’

I don’t think Bishop Hilarion is one of the nasty knee-jerk anti-Westerners. If he says something doesn’t agree with Orthodox theology it probably doesn’t.

Thank you!

Diane

If God is patient enough to wait for the conversion of the many stony hearts, East and West, I suppose we will have to be also. But patience is not enough. We need to commit ourselves to prayer and acts of generosity toward one another that they be converted.

With all due respect…how do you know this? Have you taken a poll of the laos throughout the Orthodox world?

I’m willing to bet that the average yia-yia or baba in the pew (or non-pew as the case may be) does not care a fig about that “Orthodoxy or Death” stuff. I bet most ordinary Orthodox (especially Cradles) would love to be reunited with their Catholic brethren.

I don’t think the anti-ecumenical intransigence so commonly seen on the Internet is at all representative of the Orthodox world.

Just my two cents’ worth…and I am commenting on only the part of your post that I could bear to read.

Diane