Can Byzantine Catholic attend Orthodox liturgy?

[MorEphrem]

itself imposed by Rome … so whose is it really?

Exactly what I was saying when I said it was not ours. It clearly is not. I can write a list of rules for you and impose them on you - is it your list of rules? What allegiance, fondness or possession of the rules do you have?

Yes and no. The EC’s have their own Code of Canons but the CCC is for the entire Church. Every church/tradition within the Church is encouraged to develop their own teaching catechism but it may not contravene the CCC.

Yes, and canons defined as disciplinary are not necessarily relevant to us. Example: the idea that liturgical obligations exist under penalty of mortal sin.

 

[VicFerrari]

itself imposed by Rome … so whose is it really?

Like it or not the primacy in the Church (next to God) rests with the Pope of Rome and not “Rome” as you suggest. That primacy is disseminated in a practical sense through the Holy See (again, not “Rome”) of which ALL Catholic traditions belong. Suri juri**s or not, primacy rests with the Chair of Peter.

That’s obviously NOT to say that the ECCs are “Roman Catholic” or that they somehow have been subsumed or “report” to the RCC as some love to suggest. The Holy See is not the RCC and vice versa.

Roma locuta. Causa finita.

Iniuriam. Noli esse cum male venti. Veterum Romanorum Pontificum locutus est per formam, Sanctae Sedi transmittenda.

The Eastern Half of the Church is either going to have to start taking responsibility for its own actions at some point (rather than continuing to blame “Rome” for all its ills) or it will die altogether.

 

[VicFerrari]

Exactly what I was saying when I said it was not ours. It clearly is not. I can write a list of rules for you and impose them on you - is it your list of rules? What allegiance, fondness or possession of the rules do you have?

Oh but it is. The Holy See is in no way limited to the Latin Rite. Some seem to still struggle with the concept of being Catholic in full communion with the Pope of Rome and being a suri juris church.

Yes, and canons defined as disciplinary are not necessarily relevant to us. Example: the idea that liturgical obligations exist under penalty of mortal sin.

The East has their own set of canons. If something in the CCC actually contravened an Eastern canon, then the canon would have primacy of course. Just how many such cases are there?

 

[dzheremi]

The Eastern Half of the Church is either going to have to start taking responsibility for its own actions at some point (rather than continuing to blame “Rome” for all its ills) or it will die altogether.

Your ecclesiology intrigues me and I’d like to subscribe to your newsletter…

But for real…whaaaaa? Something tells me that if the “Eastern Half” of your communion dies out it will because of obsequiousness on the part of Eastern/Oriental Catholics themselves, after being fed several lifetimes worth rubbish that treats them as lesser beings and presupposes treachery anytime they, in the heeding the call to return to their traditions that come from the Roman Popes themselves, affirm and act upon their traditions in contradiction of the picture of Catholicism painted by perhaps well-meaning but certainly misguided folks from elsewhere in the communion who once again swoop in on their Latin steeds to save the Easterners and Orientals from themselves.

I am speculating that this might be their end because that’s what they’ve told me. Because I’ve asked them and listened to what they say. You should try doing the same sometime instead of simply repeating “the law” as you know it. You’d be surprised how different their Catholicism is from yours.

 

[Wandile]

Typical Latin theology says that popes can trump any disciplinary practices of the Church. Here you go:

“…for it is the mind of the Catholic Church that each individual Church or Rite should retain its traditions whole and entire and likewise that it should adapt its way of life to the different needs of time and place.” - Pope Paul VI, Vatican II, ORIENTALIUM ECCLESIARUM
Source: vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_orientalium-ecclesiarum_en.html

We do not have obligations in our Eastern traditions. I will stick with Pope Paul VI and Vatican II on this one. It does not matter who worked on the CCC, it is full of latinizations and Eastern Catholics are to be Eastern, not Western.

Ok so your canons stipulate that eastern Catholics may commune in schismatic churches as opposed to a catholic church? Even when a catholic church is available for you to attend? Please show me this canon:shrug:

Its called the catechism of the Catholic Church… Not the Catechism of the Roman Church…

Anybody here knows about how you are to retain your traditions as eastern Christians. So show me where in the tradition of any of the eastern churches, communion with schismatics allowed when a catholic church is available?

I’ve read the church fathers , both eastern and western, and I have never come across a father who taught communing in a schismatic church is ok even when a catholic church is there for you to attend. This ties in closely with extra Ecclesiam nulla salus

 

[Zekariya]

Ok so your canons stipulate that eastern Catholics may commune in schismatic churches as opposed to a catholic church? Even when a catholic church is available for you to attend? Please show me this canon:shrug:

Its called the catechism of the Catholic Church… Not the Catechism of the Roman Church…

Anybody here knows about how you are to retain your traditions as eastern Christians. So show me where in the tradition of any of the eastern churches, communion with schismatics allowed when a catholic church is available?

I’ve read the church fathers , both eastern and western, and I have never come across a father who taught communing in a schismatic church is ok even when a catholic church is there for you to attend. This ties in closely with extra Ecclesiam nulla salus

1. While I am in favor of attending Orthodox services (when there are no Eastern Catholic ones), I was only stating that we have no tradition of obligations in the East.
2. I have never suggested communing in Orthodox Churches. Please re-read my posts. This would be offensive to the Orthodox.

 

[Zekariya]

Like it or not the primacy in the Church (next to God) rests with the Pope of Rome and not “Rome” as you suggest. That primacy is disseminated in a practical sense through the Holy See (again, not “Rome”) of which ALL Catholic traditions belong. Suri juri**s or not, primacy rests with the Chair of Peter.

That’s obviously NOT to say that the ECCs are “Roman Catholic” or that they somehow have been subsumed or “report” to the RCC as some love to suggest. The Holy See is not the RCC and vice versa.

Iniuriam. Noli esse cum male venti. Veterum Romanorum Pontificum locutus est per formam, Sanctae Sedi transmittenda.

The Eastern Half of the Church is either going to have to start taking responsibility for its own actions at some point (rather than continuing to blame “Rome” for all its ills) or it will die altogether.

I will quote Archbishop Joseph Tawil (of thrice blessed memory):
“One prime source of spiritual assimilation for Eastern Catholics has been the phenomenon known as ‘latinization’, the copying by Eastern Catholics of the theology, spiritual practices, and liturgical customs of the Latin Church. Latinization implies either the superiority of the Roman rite -the position denounced by Vatican II – or the desirability of the assimilation process, an opinion with which we cannot agree. Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin rite to manifest one’s Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church. As we have said above, to do this would be to betray our ecumenical mission and, in a real sense, to betray the Catholic Church.”
Source: melkite.org/faith/faith-worship/the-courage-to-be-ourselves#A_SECOND_DANGER_THE_ASSIMILATION_PROCESS

 

[MorEphrem]

VicFerrari, I will say I commend your interest in sincere and civil discussion.

I think, however, you confuse primacy and supremacy.

 

[VicFerrari]

Something tells me that if the “Eastern Half” of your communion dies out it will because of obsequiousness on the part of Eastern/Oriental Catholics themselves.

Has absolutely nothing at all to do with obsequiousness. It has to do with apathy and a deeply held conviction by too many to blame “Rome” for their own problems.

after being fed several lifetimes worth rubbish that treats them as lesser beings.

There’s that apathy with a healthy dose of nonsense mixed in. Rather than focus on what ECCs can do to help themselves (which is becoming almost unlimited with Francis at the tiller) it’s just too seductive and easy for Easterners to stew about the past. Terriby destructive.

…and presupposes treachery anytime they, in the heeding the call to return to their traditions that come from the Roman Popes themselves, affirm and act upon their traditions in contradiction of the picture of Catholicism painted by perhaps well-meaning but certainly misguided folks from elsewhere in the communion who once again swoop in on their Latin steeds to save the Easterners and Orientals from themselves.

Yeah? How about a few recent examples? Take the unfortunate comments of Cardinal Leonardo Sandri (do you have any others at all in mind?) regarding Eastern priestly celibacy in the US. Rather than simply ignore them as most US EC bishops have (good job Bishop Gerald!), far too many ECs want to bitterly luxuriate in his stultified comments which they seem to view as a juicy catch-all excuse for their mounting problems.

I am speculating that this might be their end because that’s what they’ve told me. Because I’ve asked them and listened to what they say. You should try doing the same sometime instead of simply repeating “the law” as you know it. You’d be surprised how different their Catholicism is from yours.

It’s not a matter of others listening. It’s a matter of ECCs (and EOs for that matter) in the USA doing everything they can do to help themselves (which is a huge amount) rather than continue to ruminate over the distant past.

 

[VicFerrari]

I will quote Archbishop Joseph Tawil (of thrice blessed memory):
“One prime source of spiritual assimilation for Eastern Catholics has been the phenomenon known as ‘latinization’, the copying by Eastern Catholics of the theology, spiritual practices, and liturgical customs of the Latin Church. Latinization implies either the superiority of the Roman rite -the position denounced by Vatican II – or the desirability of the assimilation process, an opinion with which we cannot agree. Not only is it unnecessary to adopt the customs of the Latin rite to manifest one’s Catholicism, it is an offense against the unity of the Church. As we have said above, to do this would be to betray our ecumenical mission and, in a real sense, to betray the Catholic Church.”
Source: melkite.org/faith/faith-worship/the-courage-to-be-ourselves#A_SECOND_DANGER_THE_ASSIMILATION_PROCESS

And?

 

[dzheremi]

Has absolutely nothing at all to do with obsequiousness. It has to do with apathy and a deeply held conviction by too many to blame “Rome” for their own problems.

Hmm. Paying close attention to the concerns of Eastern and Oriental Catholic posters here makes it hard for me to believe this to be the case. This is the obsequiousness I’m talking about: Rome has actually called for her Eastern compatriots to return to their traditions as much as possible, but many in the churches themselves are resistant, often out of fidelity to Rome (in the form of consciously or unconsciously taking Rome as the archetype of all things Catholic), or a confused sense of exactly what this means since there is apparently a sort of “porous border” through which anything may pass, so long as it can be even vaguely identified as “Eastern” (e.g., Coptic Catholics borrowing hymns and even whole services from Maronites, for some reason; this was pointed out to me by a Maronite in a recent thread…I kinda doubt hatred of Rome had anything to do with that one!).

There’s that apathy with a healthy dose of nonsense mixed in. Rather than focus on what ECCs can do to help themselves (which is becoming almost unlimited with Francis at the tiller) it’s just too seductive and easy for Easterners to stew about the past. Terriby destructive.

Sometimes you have to know the past in order to tell if you’re on the right trajectory.

Yeah? How about a few recent examples?

Thirteen and counting, as a matter of fact.

It’s not a matter of others listening. It’s a matter of ECCs (and EOs for that matter) in the USA doing everything they can do to help themselves (which is a huge amount) rather than continue to ruminate over the distant past.

It’s not the distant past if you’re still doing it.

 

[VicFerrari]

Hmm. Paying close attention to the concerns of Eastern and Oriental Catholic posters here makes it hard for me to believe this to be the case. This is the obsequiousness I’m talking about: Rome has actually called for her Eastern compatriots to return to their traditions as much as possible, but many in the churches themselves are resistant, often out of fidelity to Rome (in the form of consciously or unconsciously taking Rome as the archetype of all things Catholic), or a confused sense of exactly what this means since there is apparently a sort of “porous border” through which anything may pass, so long as it can be even vaguely identified as “Eastern” (e.g., Coptic Catholics borrowing hymns and even whole services from Maronites, for some reason; this was pointed out to me by a Maronite in a recent thread…I kinda doubt hatred of Rome had anything to do with that one!).

Sometimes you have to know the past in order to tell if you’re on the right trajectory.

Thirteen and counting, as a matter of fact.

It’s not the distant past if you’re still doing it.

“Thirteen and counting, huh?”

Your focus is clear. Lament rather than do. If you focused on doing you might have to take responsibility for your actions. Far easier to blame “Rome.”

It’s sad to watch both the ECCs and the EOCs make excuses for not bring God to more people. They simply will not or cannot evangelize. So many parishes are running on momentum from past generations. Time is running out until even larger downsizings take place.

 

[malphono]

Like it or not the primacy in the Church (next to God) rests with the Pope of Rome and not “Rome” as you suggest. That primacy is disseminated in a practical sense through the Holy See (again, not “Rome”) of which ALL Catholic traditions belong. Suri juri**s or not, primacy rests with the Chair of Peter.

Thank you for the lessons in (a) semantics and (b) ultramontanism.

That’s obviously NOT to say that the ECCs are “Roman Catholic” or that they somehow have been subsumed or “report” to the RCC as some love to suggest. The Holy See is not the RCC and vice versa.

Iniuriam. Noli esse cum male venti. Veterum Romanorum Pontificum locutus est per formam, Sanctae Sedi transmittenda.

The Eastern Half of the Church is either going to have to start taking responsibility for its own actions at some point (rather than continuing to blame “Rome” for all its ills) or it will die altogether.

Those are actually quite amusing.

 

[dzheremi]

What actions do I have to take responsibility for? I’m not any kind of communicant in the Roman communion, so there is nothing that I might be responsible for with regard to it. I just don’t think you’re being fair to others by dismissing their viewpoints as bitterness or historical griping when all they’re doing is sticking to their traditional understanding of what their faith consists of and does not consist of, which is what they’re encouraged to do by Rome these days. It has nothing to do with lamenting anything. I’m Orthodox. I have nothing to lament concerning how Rome treats its “Eastern lung”, since that’s none of my business in the first place (let the EC/OC Christians figure that out for themselves), but that’s not going to stop me from recognizing and rejecting lousy attitudes, no matter who holds them. Either the non-Latin churches in the Roman communion have their own ecclesiological outlooks which are not to be belittled or tampered with or made to conform with those of outsiders for any reason, or they don’t and they might as well just be Latins, because Latins apparently have the right to dictate to them what they should and should not be doing, what is binding upon them and what is not, etc., all because Rome or some Latin Church document says so (nevermind the part where Rome also says that they are to return to their traditions, and the part where they were told in the first place, years ago, that they would not have to change anything to enter into union with Rome…maybe that’s the problem, that there are these parallel messages? Anyway, I have to believe it’s not sacrificing anything of their fidelity to Rome as a See to have their own ways of looking at things, or else Rome wouldn’t have asked them to return to their own traditions.)

 

[VicFerrari]

Thank you for the lessons in (a) semantics and (b) ultramontanism.

Those are actually quite amusing.

About what I expected. Some easterners become quite difficult when they are reminded that the Holy See does not equate to the Latin Rite of the Church. If they actually saw the light it would be far more difficult to blame “Rome” for their ills today.

 

[Misplaced_Book]

“Thirteen and counting, huh?”

Your focus is clear. Lament rather than do. If you focused on doing you might have to take responsibility for your actions. Far easier to blame “Rome.”

It’s sad to watch both the ECCs and the EOCs make excuses for not bring God to more people. They simply will not or cannot evangelize. So many parishes are running on momentum from past generations. Time is running out until even larger downsizings take place.

Not evangelizing? That is news to the increasing number of Missions that the multiple jurisdictions are setting up across the US, as well as the Mission Churches and Churches of Korea, Japan, China, Indonesia, etc…

You keep talking about the Eastern Catholics blaming Rome for their own problems. What problems are those?

It is hard for the Eastern Lung to “Evangelize” when you have jurisdictional turf wars, which Latin Polemicists accuse us of but deny within their own territory. The issue of married clergy and the hamstringing of Eastern Eparchies (because we don’t want to tick off any Latin Bishops). How can the Eastern half of your Communion expand when it is hemmed in? The attitude towards Eastern practice by some I have seen on this forum elsewhere isn’t helpful either, as their “Catholic” credentials are questioned, and treated like they are Orthodox in disguise…a fifth column, if you will.

 

[malphono]

About what I expected. Some easterners become quite difficult when they are reminded that the Holy See does not equate to the Latin Rite of the Church. If they actually saw the light it would be far more difficult to blame “Rome” for their ills today.

How nice. ta ta

 

[Seamus_L]

When a person begins attending an Orthodox church because obviously they feel something is lacking in there Catholic one, the handwriting is often already on the wall that they are beginning the process that will take them out of the Catholic church.

 

[dvdjs]

This has little to do with the OP. Many byzantine catholics attend services at EO churches, not because they feel that something is wrong in the CC, but in order to go to services in their own RIte that, for any number of reasons, they might otherwise miss. Not a problem for those rooted in their tradition.

 

[dvdjs]

Thirteen and counting, as a matter of fact.

I am curious about this search - seems like a fact among all of the chatter - but it comes up empty when I go tot the URL. What is it?