A question for the Orthodox

[SavedbyHisBlood]

Ok so here is another question:

My understanding is that the Orthodox believe basically the same things as Catholics (minus the papacy, purgatory, and indulgences though they may have similar beliefs though not exact, none of which are required for salvation) So since the Orthodox and the Catholics believe basically the same thing as far at the Eucharist goes, may a Catholic take the Eucharist in an Orthodox church and vice versa?

 

[crazzeto]

Ok so here is another question:

My understanding is that the Orthodox believe basically the same things as Catholics (minus the papacy, purgatory, and indulgences though they may have similar beliefs though not exact, none of which are required for salvation) So since the Orthodox and the Catholics believe basically the same thing as far at the Eucharist goes, may a Catholic take the Eucharist in an Orthodox church and vice versa?

The Catholic Church as freely opened it’s doors to the E. Orthodox to receive communion in Catholic Mass w/o any special dispensation of the local Bishop.

The same is not true the other way around, the Orthodox still require a special dispensation from the local Bishop prior to a Catholic receiving communion in their Mass. So you would have to have a conversation with the local Orthodox Bishop before walking up the isle to receive.

In either case, celebration the Eucharist in a Mass not of your specific faith tradition in this way should only be done if you have no access to your own Church. So that is to say you shouldn’t just approch an Orthodox Bishop and ask to receive communion in one of his Churches if there’s a Catholic Church right down the street. If there is, I have every confidence the Orthodox Bishop will direct you there. Like wise, even though Rome opens up her communion to Orthodox lay, still… They should receive in their own Church if there is one available to them locally rather than celebrate at a Catholic mass.

 

[SavedbyHisBlood]

The Catholic Church as freely opened it’s doors to the E. Orthodox to receive communion in Catholic Mass w/o any special dispensation of the local Bishop.

The same is not true the other way around, the Orthodox still require a special dispensation from the local Bishop prior to a Catholic receiving communion in their Mass. So you would have to have a conversation with the local Orthodox Bishop before walking up the isle to receive.

In either case, celebration the Eucharist in a Mass not of your specific faith tradition in this way should only be done if you have no access to your own Church. So that is to say you shouldn’t just approch an Orthodox Bishop and ask to receive communion in one of his Churches if there’s a Catholic Church right down the street. If there is, I have every confidence the Orthodox Bishop will direct you there. Like wise, even though Rome opens up her communion to Orthodox lay, still… They should receive in their own Church if there is one available to them locally rather than celebrate at a Catholic mass.

Understandable, I wouldn’t go to another church just to take communion if i was able to go to my own. The reason i asked was partly out of curiosity and partly bc i am in the military and so i travel a lot… so basically for future referance

 

[Mickey]

may a Catholic take the Eucharist in an Orthodox church and vice versa?

For Orthodox Christians, the Eucharist is a visible sign of unity; to receive the Eucharist in a community to which one does not belong is improper. If one does not accept all that the Church believes and teaches and worships, one cannot make a visible sign of unity with it. The Eucharist is the result of unity, not the means by which unity is achieved. While many non-Orthodox see this as a sign that the Orthodox Church excludes non-Orthodox from the Eucharist, in reality the opposite is true. Because a non-Orthodox individual has chosen not to embrace all that Orthodox Christianity holds, the non-Orthodox individual makes it impossible for an Orthodox priest to offer him or her communion.
oca.org/QA.asp?ID=107&SID=3

There can be exceptions for good reason or cause.

On the Catholic side, I am not sure. Throughout my many decades in the Catholic Church, I do not recall one time when a priest questioned someone as to whether they were of the “Catholic Communion” or not. Many times, (especially weddings and funerals) I saw protestants receiving at the Catholic Church with no questions asked. But in fairness to the Roman Catholic priest, sometimes there are so many people receiving, it would be impossible for him to question everyone–so he would leave it up to the individual and their conscience.

Most of the time, the Orthodox Church is so small, that the priest knows everyone–and so he would know who was a visitor. The Orthodox priest usually knows when his own parishioners have not been to confession in a very long time and may gently tell him/her that it is time to go to confession.

I have even heard of Orthodox parishioners who have been asked not receive because the priest smelled cigarettes on their breath–we must fast from bedtime the night before until after receiving–and that goes for smoking too.

 

[crazzeto]

Understandable, I wouldn’t go to another church just to take communion if i was able to go to my own. The reason i asked was partly out of curiosity and partly bc i am in the military and so i travel a lot… so basically for future referance

If you ever find your self in this situation (actually quite rare) then seek the permission of the local bishop before receiving.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

WHY? Shouldn’t your case stand on its own without need for Orthodox backup?

Protestants are tough adversaries; **we need the Orthodox to bolster our case. **They don’t really need us because this is not their forum but one always expect some returns for favors given, so they are here and do some bits of proselytizing of their own. All’s fair …

BTW we need the Lutherans to go against those Baptists. Except we have to figure out some concessions for you guys.

We need the LDS to face the Muslims … .

 

[Contarini]

LOL…

It never ceases to amaze me, however, as an outsider looking in, how posters on the forum continue to try to minimize the differences between Rome and Orthodoxy. Are they more similar than Rome and Protestantism? Probably, at least inasmuch as apostolic succession, the sacraments, etc go. That doesn’t mean that they are, otherwise, even near each other in overall theological and dogmatic outlooks.

From the Catholic perspective they are. Just as many of us Anglicans would say that the differences between us and Rome are pretty minor–Rome might not agree!

I don’t think it should amaze you. Given a post-Vatican-II, “nouvelle theologie” approach, the differences look pretty small. Louis Bouyer argued that the two churches were really one church, in spite of appearances.

Edwin

Edwin

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I think if we look at all the big ideas like the differences between the concept of Original Sin, Papal Supremacy/Infallibility and filioque, and then we look at the minutiae like levened bread, categorizing sins, purgatory, penances, indulgences, Augustinian theology, how we are forgiven in confession, how saints are canonized, traditions like the stations, seasons, calendars, etc. then we really come to realize they are not so similar and it’s much more substantive than superficial. That’s just my take anyway.

From the Catholic perspective they are. Just as many of us Anglicans would say that the differences between us and Rome are pretty minor–Rome might not agree!

I don’t think it should amaze you. Given a post-Vatican-II, “nouvelle theologie” approach, the differences look pretty small. Louis Bouyer argued that the two churches were really one church, in spite of appearances.

Edwin

Edwin

 

[Bluegoat]

WHY? Shouldn’t your case stand on its own without need for Orthodox backup?

Gurney, I notice you have changed your religious affiliation - I had gathered you were a Herbert fan, but are you still a Catholic? It sounds like you might not be?

 

[SteveVH]

If anyone is interested, the following is the actual Catholic teaching on the subject:

“…Those 'who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist” (CCC par 838)

 

[Reuben_J]

From the Catholic perspective they are. Just as many of us Anglicans would say that the differences between us and Rome are pretty minor–Rome might not agree!

I don’t think it should amaze you. Given a post-Vatican-II, “nouvelle theologie” approach, the differences look pretty small. Louis Bouyer argued that the two churches were really one church, in spite of appearances.

Edwin

Edwin

Unlike the Orthodox and Lutherans, Episcopalians are the cousins that Catholics can do without. You know, like bringing down the image.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I figured Muad’dib worship was easier and less complicated than Catholicism or Orthodoxy LOL…no pesky filoque to debate…just take some spice essence and I’m good to go…

Gurney, I notice you have changed your religious affiliation - I had gathered you were a Herbert fan, but are you still a Catholic? It sounds like you might not be?

 

[Reuben_J]

WHY? Shouldn’t your case stand on its own without need for Orthodox backup?

In an impulsive moment and inexplicably I thought Orthodox might like to hear that.

 

[Nine_Two]

In an impulsive moment and inexplicably I thought Orthodox might like to hear that.

Regardless of whether or not our Churches need each other backing each other up, I’ve always thought those things that we, as well as the OO and the Assyrians hold in common (such as a liturgy, apostolic succession, etc.) does seem to be a major argument that that is the way things always were in the early church, none of this stuff like pastors with their own churches and whatnot.

 

[Bluegoat]

Regardless of whether or not our Churches need each other backing each other up, I’ve always thought those things that we, as well as the OO and the Assyrians hold in common (such as a liturgy, apostolic succession, etc.) does seem to be a major argument that that is the way things always were in the early church, none of this stuff like pastors with their own churches and whatnot.

Often when I am considering the merits of a position, I look to see what all the apostolic/liturgical Churches say. If there is a lot of commonality I tend to think that is very suggestive. Sometimes where the differences are can be suggestive too.

 

[Bluegoat]

I figured Muad’dib worship was easier and less complicated than Catholicism or Orthodoxy LOL…no pesky filoque to debate…just take some spice essence and I’m good to go…

And it is still more substantial than those annoying Jedi wannabees!

 

[Non_Serviam]

And it is still more substantial than those annoying Jedi wannabees!

You’d prefer Sith?

 

[Hesychios]

Unfortunately, though, I have to say, I have not encountered the same eagerness for reunion in the Orthodox I have met.

Unfortunately, you and I are defining unity differently.

Orthodox typically want Catholics to renounce the Latin theological tradition and praxis (which comes from the first millennium)

This is not true.

… along with the alleged heresies of the second millennium.

They are not merely allegations, but your point is correct. This is part and parcel of unity in the Orthodox understanding.

Catholics are generally willing to compromise,

Compromise is not actually possible in matters of the received Faith. It is born out of indifferentism and syncretism.

One simply must be Orthodox, and believe in it, to commune with Orthodox.

That is true unity. We all pray for unity.

 

[Reuben_J]

Regardless of whether or not our Churches need each other backing each other up, I’ve always thought those things that we, as well as the OO and the Assyrians hold in common (such as a liturgy, apostolic succession, etc.) does seem to be a major argument that that is the way things always were in the early church, none of this stuff like pastors with their own churches and whatnot.

Honestly, Catholic does not need it and she is perfectly built on a rock on her own. Having said that we cannot ignore the fact that God wants his people to be one and the Church has to show something about it. It’s not because of any backing or anything. I was just thinking perhaps the Orthodox think that way and as if Catholic seems to be an eager suitor.

 

[Hesychios]

Often when I am considering the merits of a position, I look to see what all the apostolic/liturgical Churches say. If there is a lot of commonality I tend to think that is very suggestive. Sometimes where the differences are can be suggestive too.

Good points.

I think the church traditions that were never in the Roman empire at any point in history have a lot to tell us. Particularly the churches in India and the horn of East Africa.

http://galen-frysinger.com/graphics/ethiopia10.jpg



One never sees, for example, a congregationalist ecclesiology, nor for that matter a non-sacramental one.