Catholic View of Salvation as an Orthodox

[Hesychios]

In fairness, I think our friend Pitcharan may be thinking of the Eastern Catholic Churches that reunited with Rome after the “first millenial divide”.

I was thinking what was meant was the Church of the East.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

He could believe latin theology and worship as an Eastern Catholic.

I don’t think eastern Catholics are expected or encouraged to believe “Latin theology.”

I would not advise anyone who was totally committed to Latin theology even to become an Eastern Catholic, much less an Orthodox Christian. A person should decide what they believe, and worship in the church community which teaches that.

I completely agree. I think this is why Latin Catholics looking to change sui iuris churches often get their request for canonical transfer denied… “I love their liturgy” isn’t enough to justify switching to an eastern Catholic church.

 

[Vico]

I am sure that when he was a young Roman Catholic that would have been the case.

People change.

Father Lev (baptized into the French Roman Catholic church and a Benedictine monk) was perfectly situated within the UGCC, knowing and working with Archbishop Sheptytskij. He could believe latin theology and worship as an Eastern Catholic.

Yet chose to become Orthodox, being fully aware of the condemnation which comes with that. At some point he has to have decided that the anathemas do not bother him, and the conversion was worth the risk.
Is this a numbers game? Are we supposed to not care what each other believe, just get them to join the church?

I would not advise anyone who was totally committed to Latin theology even to become an Eastern Catholic, much less an Orthodox Christian. A person should decide what they believe, and worship in the church community which teaches that.

Normally the choice is for adults catechumens becoming Catholic or Orthodox, not for those baptized as infants, but some exceptions are made for spiritual good such as in marriage or for the family or self.

CCEO

Canon 8
In full communion with the Catholic Church on this earth are those baptized persons who are joined with Christ in its visible structure by the bonds of profession of faith, of the sacraments and of ecclesiastical governance.

Canon 17
The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescriptions of their own Church sui iuris,and to follow their own form of spiritual life consonant with the teaching of the Church.

Canon 10
Attached to the Word of God and adhering to the authentic, living magisterium of the Church, the Christian faithful are bound to maintain integrally the faith which was preserved and transmitted at a great price by many and to profess it openly as well as to strive both to understand it better and to make it fruitful in works of charity.

Canon 12

1. The Christian faithful are bound by an obligation in their own patterns of activity always to maintain communion with the Church.
2. They are to fulfill with great diligence the duties which they owe to the universal Church and to their own Church sui iuris.

 

[Hesychios]

I don’t think eastern Catholics are expected or encouraged to believe "Latin theology."

Neither do I encourage it. (Although I am pretty sure it was encouraged in the past, to the point that many Eastern Catholics were brought up on the Baltimore catechism in English speaking countries).

But it is still very common among Eastern Catholic themselves and has always been allowed to them (especially in his day, 100 years ago), so why would Father Lev feel compelled to switch to or become exclusively Orthodox if he still believed Latin theology? I could be wrong about this but am thinking he changed a lot more than just church affiliation.

 

[Hesychios]

Normally the choice is for adults catechumens becoming Catholic or Orthodox, not for those baptized as infants, but some exceptions are made for spiritual good such as in marriage or for the family or self.

Yes, that is true, we do not leave this undecided for children. We choose for them.

However (I wish I was more concise), I was thinking of those adults who are thinking of attending another church for reasons other than a change in beliefs.

Lex orandi lex credendi is particularly important to me and I do not encourage breaching that.

 

[Hesychios]

I don’t think eastern Catholics are expected or encouraged to believe "Latin theology."

Neither do I encourage it. (Although I am pretty sure it was encouraged in the past, to the point that many Eastern Catholics were brought up on the Baltimore catechism in English speaking countries).

But it is still very common among Eastern Catholic themselves and has always been allowed to them (especially in his day, 100 years ago), so why would Father Lev feel compelled to switch to or become exclusively Orthodox if he still believed Latin theology? I could be wrong about this but am thinking he changed a lot more than just church affiliation.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

I don’t think eastern Catholics are expected or encouraged to believe “Latin theology.”

Neither do I encourage it. (Although I am pretty sure it was encouraged in the past, to the point that many Eastern Catholics were brought up on the Baltimore catechism in English speaking countries).

But it is still very common among Eastern Catholic themselves and has always been allowed to them (especially in his day, 100 years ago), so why would Father Lev feel compelled to switch to or become exclusively Orthodox if he still believed Latin theology? I could be wrong about this but am thinking he changed a lot more than just church affiliation.

I’m having “flashback” - yes, as a seven year old preparing for First Holy Communion (back in the “Latinized” days, before the reintroduction of the full Rites of Initiation - Baptism, Chrismation and Eucharist), I was schooled in the Baltimore Catechism (still have the book). It even seemed strange to me at that young age, but back then, we suffered from a lack of resources to properly educate our children. We now have a fairly well developed Eastern Christian Formation program, using texts jointly developed with sister churches of the Eastern Catholic Rites in the US.

But I’ve been fortunate that my generation has seen both and lived through the transition back to our Eastern Christian roots. I’d agree with Hesychios that a good number of older adults, the surviving first American born among our faithful in particular, do still exhibit a Latin view and understanding of theology. Many of them were educated in Roman Catholic schools. There were many other factors that attributed to this tendency, as well, including “Latinization” of our Rites, especially in the US.

Today, through thoughful homilies on scripture and feast days, observance of a more complete liturgical cycle, adult catechesis and other means, this is slowly but surely turning around. I do think my children will be among the first of a generation to be “more purely Byzantine”, and do have a better appreciation of their faith traditions than my generation did at their age.

All that said, in fair acknowledgement of many comments and observations of our Orthodox friends in this forum, we are a hybrid of Catholicism and Orthodoxy due to a number of unfortunate historical factors. We are now encouraged and supported by the Catholic Church to return to our Orthodox roots in terms of liturgical practice and discipline, and that most assuredly is happening to this day.

However, while we may come at things from an Eastern perspective (more often these days), our theological views are not at odds with the Latin West. They are reconcilable, as noted in this in other posts on sundry topics. But this degree of understanding was and still is the result of a long, difficult, continuing journey even within the Catholic communion. Hopefully, our challenging experience provides a potential roadmap for meaningful reconciliation with our Orthodox brothers and sisters.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Neither do I encourage it. (Although I am pretty sure it was encouraged in the past, to the point that many Eastern Catholics were brought up on the Baltimore catechism in English speaking countries).

Yeah, that’s a real shame. I’m grateful for the direction the Catholic Church has moved in since Vatican II, which exhorted the eastern Catholic churches to eliminate Latinizations and be true to their heritage… whether eastern, oriental, Assyrian, etc.

But it is still very common among Eastern Catholic themselves and has always been allowed to them (especially in his day, 100 years ago), so why would Father Lev feel compelled to switch to or become exclusively Orthodox if he still believed Latin theology? I could be wrong about this but am thinking he changed a lot more than just church affiliation.

Oh, yes; I wasn’t thinking about back then. Now I see I might have been taking your words out of their intended historical context.

I’m having “flashback” - yes, as a seven year old preparing for First Holy Communion (back in the “Latinized” days, before the reintroduction of the full Rites of Initiation - Baptism, Chrismation and Eucharist), I was schooled in the Baltimore Catechism (still have the book). It even seemed strange to me at that young age, but back then, we suffered from a lack of resources to properly educate our children. We now have a fairly well developed Eastern Christian Formation program, using texts jointly developed with sister churches of the Eastern Catholic Rites in the US.

But I’ve been fortunate that my generation has seen both and lived through the transition back to our Eastern Christian roots. I’d agree with Hesychios that a good number of older adults, the surviving first American born among our faithful in particular, do still exhibit a Latin view and understanding of theology. Many of them were educated in Roman Catholic schools. There were many other factors that attributed to this tendency, as well, including “Latinization” of our Rites, especially in the US.

Today, through thoughful homilies on scripture and feast days, observance of a more complete liturgical cycle, adult catechesis and other means, this is slowly but surely turning around. I do think my children will be among the first of a generation to be “more purely Byzantine”, and do have a better appreciation of their faith traditions than my generation did at their age.

All that said, in fair acknowledgement of many comments and observations of our Orthodox friends in this forum, we are a hybrid of Catholicism and Orthodoxy due to a number of unfortunate historical factors. We are now encouraged and supported by the Catholic Church to return to our Orthodox roots in terms of liturgical practice and discipline, and that most assuredly is happening to this day.

However, while we may come at things from an Eastern perspective (more often these days), our theological views are not at odds with the Latin West. They are reconcilable, as noted in this in other posts on sundry topics. But this degree of understanding was and still is the result of a long, difficult, continuing journey even within the Catholic communion. Hopefully, our challenging experience provides a potential roadmap for meaningful reconciliation with our Orthodox brothers and sisters.

Beautifully said.

 

[Vico]

Yes, that is true, we do not leave this undecided for children. We choose for them.

However (I wish I was more concise), I was thinking of those adults who are thinking of attending another church for reasons other than a change in beliefs.

Lex orandi lex credendi is particularly important to me and I do not encourage breaching that.

For those not familiar with the terminology:

**CCC 1124 **The Church’s faith precedes the faith of the believer who is invited to adhere to it. When the Church celebrates the sacraments, she confesses the faith received from the apostles - whence the ancient saying: *lex orandi, lex credendi *(or: legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi, according to Prosper of Aquitaine [5th cent.]). The law of prayer is the law of faith: the Church believes as she prays. Liturgy is a constitutive element of the holy and living Tradition.