Hello Steve,

>LL>It has long been a desire of popes for reunification with the
>LL>Orthodox church.

>SA>I haven't specifically followed this issue, as it isn't prominent
>SA>in Oz.

>LL>It has been a dream of Roman Catholic pontiffs for a thousand
>LL>years.

>SA>Hmmm... I wonder if the various Orthodox Metropolitans (etc) shared
>SA>the same dream. Even in Oz, there is occasionally a small scale feud
>SA>if some out-of-favour (arch)bishop arrives without an invitation or
>SA>welcome from the heirarchy - they seem to be very territorial, though
>SA>even Catholics can be, as I recall. It is apparently a no-no for the
>SA>head of one diocese to turn up in another diocese without invitation.

>LL>The diocese is the functional unit of the church.  Whether Roman or
>LL>Orthodox, a bishop is the head of a diocese.  That is why it is
>LL>considered a definite no-no for a bishop of one diocese to show up
>LL>in another diocese uninvited.  IOW, an RCC bishop would not show up
>LL>in another RCC diocese uninvited, same as an Orthodox bishop would
>LL>not show up in another Orthodox diocese uninvited.

SA>The RCC bishops observe the protocol (and probably Anglicans, Assembly
SA>of God, Baptist etc do also), but the Orthodox have factions which get
SA>a bit passionate at times, especially if a bishop of the wrong faction
SA>arrives in Oz uninvited. It doesn't happen all that often, but it does
SA>happen.

It's called protecting one's turf.  :)

>LL>Even the pope, who is the bishop of Rome, would not show up in
>LL>another diocese uninvited.  Even though most RCC bishops would love
>LL>for him to visit.  :)

SA>His visit certainly wouldn't go unnoticed! :)

Maybe an exception would be to make a speech at the United Nations,
which is located in New York City.  And any religious leader who did
that would be sure to get worldwide attention.  ;)

>LL>As well as better relations with other Christians,

>SA>I have specifically followed this, e.g. ARCIC (Anglicans and Roman
>SA>Catholics in Communion); Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue;
>SA>rise of Pentecostal / Charismatic movements, etc. It will make
>SA>it easier to promote Europe as a united continent if its various
>SA>Catholic & Protestant churches unite and recognise the Pope as
>SA>head of the "Universal Church"; Presidents and leaders are
>SA>fawning all over JP 2 (and now B 16) as great moral authorities.

>LL>JPII was a theological conservative.  Benedict XVI appears to also
>LL>be a theological conservative, following in the footsteps of the
>LL>late JPII. But JPII was definitely NOT a political conservative.

SA>I guess it depends on how one views a theological conservative; to me,
SA>the notion of seeking Christian and wider religious unity, as expounded
SA>in B 16's inaugural outdoor mas, smacks of rejection of the biblical
SA>concept of separation, and plays into the hands of the "god of this
SA>world" (Satan) and his false Messiah, the Beast 666.

If the pope were to be making a case for wider religious unity based on
religious freedom, it would be an error.  IOW, all religions are not
the same.  Arguing that all religions are the same, or more or less the
same, is a defined heresy, that of indifferentism.  What the pope is
referring to is freedom of conscience, which is based on the dignity of
the human person, NOT on the basis of religious freedom.

>>> Continued to next message

 * SLMR 2.1a * All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5