“Orthodox in communion with Rome”

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter_J
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cavaradossi said:
Saturdays and Sundays are not days of fasting, excepting Holy and Great Saturday, which is why they are all elevated to oil and wine days throughout all of Great Lent, just as the Feast of the Annunciation is not properly considered a day of fasting either. It is, in fact, forbidden to fast on Saturday or Sunday, except on Great and Holy Saturday
Click to expand...
Tell that to my Russian Orthodox friends - who get chided by clergy for having brought pyrogi fried in vegetable oil on sundays!

I live in a state where Orthodoxy is just a hair shy of 20% of the population - in the Diocese of Alaska, fasting on saturdays and sundays is not only common, but both officially encouraged and socially enforced by the babushki.

The Greeks and Antiochians are far less over the top with it, but they are a small fraction of Orthodoxy in Alaska - maybe 10% of Orthodoxy (2% of the state), if even that much, and then only in Anchorage.
 
Aramis said:
Tell that to my Russian Orthodox friends - who get chided by clergy for having brought pyrogi fried in vegetable oil on sundays!

I live in a state where Orthodoxy is just a hair shy of 20% of the population - in the Diocese of Alaska, fasting on saturdays and sundays is not only common, but both officially encouraged and socially enforced by the babushki.

The Greeks and Antiochians are far less over the top with it, but they are a small fraction of Orthodoxy in Alaska - maybe 10% of Orthodoxy (2% of the state), if even that much, and then only in Anchorage.
Click to expand...
I can only say that their clergy are mistaken then, for chiding people for eating oil when oil is permitted, just as one would be mistaken to instruct people to fast on bright week. Now if the clergy are expressing a preference that people not eat too heavily (consuming fried foods in excess) during lent, that is one thing. But if they are instructing the faithful to fast until sunset and to abstain from oil even on Sunday, then that is not quite right.
 
Cavaradossi said:
I can only say that their clergy are mistaken then, for chiding people for eating oil when oil is permitted, just as one would be mistaken to instruct people to fast on bright week. Now if the clergy are expressing a preference that people not eat too heavily (consuming fried foods in excess) during lent, that is one thing. But if they are instructing the faithful to fast until sunset and to abstain from oil even on Sunday, then that is not quite right.
Click to expand...
They are strongly encouraging what is the local tradition: Nothing with a spine, as well as no eggs, no milk, no oil, no alcohol, for all of the great fast… but only on Holy Saturday have I ever heard any of them talk of missing a meal!
 
Do Eastern Catholics (at least of the Byzantine Rite) need to be Orthodox in communion with Rome? I know at the time of union the bishops from the Eastern Churches wanted to preserve their traditions, but given that development of traditions is an organic nature of the Church, why can’t we be happy with what we are right now? Why do we have to be like the Orthdox if we are Catholics?
 
ConstantineTG said:
Do Eastern Catholics (at least of the Byzantine Rite) need to be Orthodox in communion with Rome? I know at the time of union the bishops from the Eastern Churches wanted to preserve their traditions, but given that development of traditions is an organic nature of the Church, why can’t we be happy with what we are right now? Why do we have to be like the Orthdox if we are Catholics?
Click to expand...
After hearing about the Melkite stance on this title, here, I found it refreshing to have it reinforced when a Melkite priest spoke in front of a Ruthenian congregation (he has a 14 part series on Theosis; and a 9-parter on East/West, on YouTube), saying Eastern Catholics must be loyal to the pope; and loyal to their Orthodox identity. It’s part of the paradoxical line of thinking, from my limited perspective, and background on Eastern churches.

I also found, in the bulletin casing at the church I’ve been going to, the maintenance of the Byzantine identity. It first talked about what made them similar to the Roman brethren, but was quick to point out, “Having said these, we are not Roman catholic.”

I don’t mind the preservation of traditions, and overall patrimony of the Eastern churches, as it allows me to learn their true richness. I came from the Roman church to learn what made the Eastern churches what they are; and what sets them apart (if applicable), from Western counterparts. I don’t know if I can speak for a majority, but I think it’s interesting when I hear of people who made the jump, from Eastern Catholic, to Orthodoxy (as you’ve discussed in other threads). For them (again, I can’t speak for all), whatever parish they’ve gone to consistently (Eastern Catholic) gave them a sense of something, or some things is/were missing, it didn’t make them fully Eastern (issue of Latinization). Hence, many of them make the transition into Orthodoxy, because it hasn’t really suffered from the aforementioned. However, I did speak to the choir director of the Orthodox church I’ve been attending for Vespers, and he told me he does pray the rosary on his own, at a Roman church nearby. But, I’m sure he doesn’t inject it into the Orthodox congregation.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Do Eastern Catholics (at least of the Byzantine Rite) need to be Orthodox in communion with Rome?
Click to expand...
Personally, I would say No to the idea that they *need *to be Orthodox in communion with Rome. Frankly, I just don’t understand that kind of one-size-fits-all thinking.
 
After a long debate between Orthodoxy and Catholicism after my return to Christianity from a 12-year stint as an atheist, I ended up choosing the former over the latter, but the fact my wife is RCC (and whole family, for that matter) hurts. There’s little difference, especially with the Melkite church, where I would have entered if I had chosen Catholicism.

“Orthodox in communion with Rome” is therefore extremely attractive to me, especially since my wife and I alternate between RCC and my EO church for Sunday services. But I realized I’d have to accept two things:
  1. Defying the orders of my priest and bishop in my Orthodox church to not commune with Rome, implying that I have the knowledge to definitively rise above their orders due to such orders being sinful, but still wishing to remain in communion, implying that the Orthodox prolonging of the schism is not as serious as formal heresy and excommunication;
  2. Classifying the de fide Roman claims of ex cathedra infallibility and universal jurisdiction also as sinful and false, but not “bad enough” to imply a loss of communion.
I don’t have the expertise to do either, by a long shot. In today’s political age including the Pope as a world leader and the top figure in Chrisian reunion, I doubt ex cathedra will be used without care or ill effect in my lifetime. But it is not how he uses it; it’s that he has it. So as much as I hate it, I’m going to choose to remain in communion only with Orthodoxy, and pray for the tide of reunion to pull harder on our hearts.
 
pdstor said:
After a long debate between Orthodoxy and Catholicism after my return to Christianity from a 12-year stint as an atheist, I ended up choosing the former over the latter …
Click to expand...
Did you start out as a Catholic?
pdstor said:
I’m going to choose to remain in communion only with Orthodoxy, and pray for the tide of reunion to pull harder on our hearts.
Click to expand...
We also pray for the unity of Christ’s Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top