Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Why I respect oc.net more than byzcath

orthodoxchristianity.net defends its true-church claim, even though it's wrong. I expected to get swatted for witnessing there, and was (suspended), but it turned out to be due to a technicality. I'm not a martyr: I was posting in the wrong places there! They allow no-holds-barred debate only in one or two folders on the board — very fair. No hard feelings, gentlemen.

byzcath, on the other hand... nothing personal but: "Mad at the Catholics? 'Dox! Both are the true church." If it's nonsectarian as it claims, its domain name shouldn't be byzcath ("Catholic": don't steal our name) nor should it be based at a site called the Byzantine Catholic Church in America (the Ruthenians — maybe Metropolitan William should have a look).
I think this whole "This forum is for Eastern Christians" fashion is on the way out.
Good, because in this relativistic form it stinks. The idea is still valid, as long as the Catholics have the guts to defend the magisterium. (At least restrict the heresy to a clearly marked folder.) I think that board really throws unlatinized Byzantine Catholics under the bus. It encourages them to 'dox, since "both are the true church." So Catholics suspect the unlatinized of being unfaithful. I wonder if that harm to the church is deliberate. Another false church — relativism in Byzantine drag, liturgical fetishists.

With Owen White I agree that the whole "self-hating Western dupes converting to schismatic Orthodoxy" fashion is over.
You know, one of the things about Latinizations is that they aren't all bad. The rosary and stations of the cross are treasures for the entire Church. Just as the Jesus Prayer and icons are too. I think it is a good idea for there to be some cross-pollination in the Church, so different rites can strengthen and inform the others. The east can benefit from more Thomas Aquinas, and the west can benefit from more St. John Damascene.
The church doesn't make you choose one or the other de fide. You can have Roman, unlatinized, or a mix.

Rite is for good order in church; liturgical. The church rightly offers both the unlatinized and latinized forms of the Greek Rite.

That the Jesus Prayer is widespread and popular is, I think, a myth in the West about Orthodoxy.

  • The faith: Christ, the Trinity, hypostatic union, Mother of God, bishops, the Mass/Real Presence, and the option of images. The Catholic Church shares all these with the Orthodox churches, and the Pope has been Christ's good servant, even though he is a sinner, by being that faith's good steward.
  • The $64,000 question is not cultural bullsh*t such as fighting over azymes, Communion under both kinds, or clerical marriage. The church includes many cultures. No, it's this: How, if at all, have ex cathedra and immediate and universal jurisdiction hindered the list of faith essentials (the original meaning and definition of Catholic, "according to the whole") I gave? (Anybody who thinks the Pope micromanages the church doesn't know any Catholics. It never was so. We're not a cult of one man; we are a body of beliefs of which he is only a caretaker — cf. Benedict XVI.)
  • Hatred of the papacy is the tie that unites all of the separated churches. — Joseph de Maistre
  • What is a "traditionalist"? (Not to be confused with the obscure heresy that taught you don't need reason to defend the faith, just tradition without explanation.) Speaking for this one, the old Mass is better and the church was better off before Vatican II, not a problem since the council didn't define any doctrine. And anyway, councils can't undo our doctrine. (Neither can the Pope.) That covers just about everybody in our camp. Me: The problem is not the council; the liberal interpretation of it is. Francis is our Pope. Because I understand the teachings of the church, I don't need alternative theories of who if anyone is the Pope. It's about the church, not the man.
  • Are images required, as in de fide? I say no. Online Orthodox have claimed the seventh ecumenical council teaches they are. That sounds wrong. The church includes rites with no images (Nestorian), a rite where they're optional (Roman), and rites that require them (Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian). All you have to believe is that your brethren using them aren't heretics for so doing. My guess is if that council said to use images, it's like Trent saying the Mass would remain in Latin. Just a rule, not de fide. Like the Russians requiring the services to be in Slavonic or the Greeks medieval Greek.
  • Wishing the unlatinized (Julian calendar) a happy feast of the Transfiguration (Преображение).

1 comment:

  1. Byzcath is a joke. It was better back around 2000, then it had some sort of server crash and morphed into what it is today, a relativistic soup of nonsense.



Leave comment