Closet orthodoxy in eastern catholicism

[Kook]

Hi Kook.
I remember reading in an encyclical or something the particular teaching the the Orthodox Churches, like the Catholic Church, have the full means of salvation. Sadly I can’t remember where I read this. I tried looking in the CCC and in the documents of Vatican II, but it wasn’t explicitly stated in either of those. Perhaps it was in John Paul II’s “Orientale Lumen.” I know that I read it in some Church document, however.

That would be quite extraordinary and contrary to pretty much everything Catholicism has said for the last millenium, including at Vatican II.

One thing that I did noticed, in reviewing the documents of Vatican II, is the statement, “It must not be forgotten that from the beginning the Churches of the East have had a treasury from which the Western Church has drawn extensively - in liturgical practice, spiritual tradition, and law. Nor must we undervalue the fact that it was the ecumenical councils held in the East that defined the basic dogmas of the Christian faith, on the Trinity, on the Word of God Who took flesh of the Virgin Mary. To preserve this faith these Churches have suffered and still suffer much.” So it would seem that there has always been an “Easternizing” tendency in the tradition of the West.

Sort of. I don’t think anyone would really argue that much of the theological heavy lifting came from Easterners. However, most of the major heresies did as well.

That being said, I do not believe that, in the event of reunion, the West should have to give up its thoroughly Western identity. The Christian East needs to respect the heritage of the Christian West every bit as much as the Christian West needs to respect the heritage of the Christian East. This takes humility, which, thanks to “old dusty Adam” and his propensity for forbidden fruit, is severely lacking in the human aspect of the Church.

This is refreshing, as I don’t encounter such a perspective very often. Perhaps I’m just surrounded by polemicists.

 

[Hesychios]

So what local or general Orthodox Council has declared this to be true?

The Latin Catholic church made it a dogmatic isue.

We cannot pretend that the ecclesiological structure based upon Papal universal jurisdiction is not a theological issue (as it was before 1870AD).

As far as I am concerned, if the synod of the Latin church wants that kind of set up, let them have it, but they cannot pretend that God wants us all in that same ecclesiastical form without making it a dogmatic theological argument (which is exactly what they did).

 

[fritzz_ezz]

When eccumenical councils are held, it is with all bishops in full visible communion with Rome including Eastern Bishops whom most certainly have (name removed by moderator)ut at council. When a church decides to come into comunion with Rome, at least to the best of my understanding (I still have some reading to do on this subject) it should be knowing the dogmatic teachings of Rome, and with assent to the specific dogmatic teachings.

There is nothing “dominating” about this, and since you feel “dominated” I would ask which dogmatic teaching specifically do you have a problem with. And I would ask you to consider the question fully, which actually dogmatically defined, as defined at council (i.e. using the language of the council) is it you have a problem with?

I’m sure we “Latins” have different understandings on certain teachings than the east, but guess what. As long as no one’s interpretation violates the teaching it really doesn’t matter. For instance, is purgatory actually a place full of fire? I imagine our eastern bretheren might disagree with those specific terms, and if you look at the dogmatic teaching. That’s actually A-OK

Christ never told us to follow dogmas of the Church. He only said, “Follow Me”. He even called your name at baptism. We follow the baptismal candle - the Light of the World. We call Him the Christ.

 

[crazzeto]

Christ never told us to follow dogmas of the Church. He only said, “Follow Me”. He even called your name at baptism. We follow the baptismal candle - the Light of the World. We call Him the Christ.

I’m a little taken aback by this answer, coming from any Christian that would call them selves orthodox (big or little o). Yes fritzz, Christ called us to follow him this is true, and ultimitaly this is what we should seek to do. But you should understand very well how following Christ is accomplished. It’s through a chain of obedience, to the Church here on earth (yes, you must be obediant to whichever particular ethnic Orthodox church you belong to). First we most be obedient to the Church, because she is the guardian of the true teaching, if we can’t do this then how in the world is it you claim you can be obediant to Christ?

As St. Paul says:

1Ti 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

We are obediant to the Church because the Church is the body of Christ, as the body of Christ (and faithful bride) she is the keeper of the true teaching. There for by being obediant to the true teaching we are obediant to Christ. If you don’t believe this, then why choose to be in any form of orthodox church?

 

[DavidKays]

Hi! I thought I may put in my 2 cents worth. I am almost finish of my book which if you will like to know has a thesis describing the relationship between East and West as God sees it. My view is this. Orthodox and Catholics are united no matter what. Whatever divided them 1000 years ago has only severed the relationship and did not create a shism. Protestants and Catholics yes are in shism but not the Orthodox and Catholics. I have written that the relationship between Catholics and Orthodox are the same as a relationship between husband and wife. The Orthodox have within themselves a masquiline quality while the Catholic Church a feminine quality. The differences between the two are OK before God because this is a marriage relationship. For instance when a man looks for a wife he is seeking someone who will complete him. Therefore his wife will have different teachings that will enable him to be benefit from as well as he has teachings that his wife will benefit from. You do not marry someone like yourself but someone who will complete you. Therefore in this light and understanding the Orthodox will have different teachings then the Catholics so as to complete her. And the Catholics will have different teachings so as to complete the Orthodox. This may in fact describe what God had started and intended. God had started a marriage between East and West, Orthodox and Catholic. What God has joined together let man not put assunder. This was in fact a marriage! And they had a fight. Couples do fight and seperate. And now through marital counceling the relationship is beginning to rebound and hopefully come back to its original design. The Orthodox are like unto a husband and the Catholics are like a wife. This husband and wife team can never be divided. It can have its problems with the wife making too many demands and therefore created this seperation but this marriage can never end. The fact or truth is that the 2 churches are united and all there need to be done is the 2 see in each other that completeness that the other can give to the other. You Catholics have an enormous teachings that can benefit the East. And you Orthodox have the same for the West. This marriage even though it has been in seperation for too long of a time will eventually discover that they need each other to the benefit of their children and for each other. The marriage will then be stronger and fully functional. Easteren Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox must have their rightful claim in the governing of the Church. If this marriage is to work then His Holiness the Pope must give to the East equal authority in the governing of the Church. The East had that authority alongside Rome for the first 1000 years and then quickly taken away from it. The East must have her rightful place alongside Rome. The husband must have his place restored so that the wife may enjoy his wisdom and understanding in the rearing of her children. Pope John Paul II wrote that the church must breathe again her 2 lungs and he also wrote that Rome must be willing to enter into a relationship with the Orthodox as Rome had with the Orthodox before this tragic seperation. What the Orthodox had in the beginning was equal authority with Rome in the government of the Church. This now has to be in place again so that this marriage may work to help God establish His kingdom on earth. All it takes to find this original relationship is to give to the East her rightful claim in the government of the church. God Bless!

 

[PGhaly]

I almost would like to say that your question is offensive and ignorant (oh I just said it). Do you want to see us, we Easterners, turn into puppets of Roman tradition, even though the Vatican again and again discouraged latinization and encouraged us to follow our tradition? What authority or status do you think you have to say that we, the Eastern lung of the Church of Christ, should leave if we disagree with Latin theologumena? Do you not know what we add to your church, that if it wasn’t for our Church fathers, it would have taken double the time it took to develop the teachings of the Catholic Church.

I have to say, your statement is blindly ethnocentric. keep out of the Eastern Church if you cannot survive the valid ecclesiastical diversity the Catholic church enjoys. We do not need more people coming in and enforcing their latin mentalities and traditions. The harm caused by Roman dominance resulted in enough hurt and schism, we do not need more of it (reminding everyone of the married priests crisis and the formation of the Orthodox Church of America as a schism). Also, before making false assumptions about the Eastern church, our theologumena and pious opinions (if you know what that even means) on Catholic doctrine, go STUDY it.

Servant of God
Phil

 

[Hesychios]

The OP is spot on. I’ve seen numerous online posters very actively promote the idea of being fully Orthodox, while somehow remaining Catholic. And where does it lead ? In numerous instances, including the CAF, it leads to people leaving the Catholic Church. Quite frankly I expect to see alot more in the future.

That is what I like about Eastern Catholicism.

It has produced some fine conversions, and even vocations to the Orthodox clerical ranks. It has really served as a bridge (a ‘safe house’ perhaps) for Latin Catholics to learn about Holy Orthodoxy.

Unlike many other Orthodox, I like the Eastern Catholic churches.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

That is what I like about Eastern Catholicism.

It has produced some fine conversions, and even vocations to the Orthodox clerical ranks. It has really served as a bridge (a ‘safe house’ perhaps) for Latin Catholics to learn about Holy Orthodoxy.

Unlike many other Orthodox, I like the Eastern Catholic churches.

Dear Hesychios. Hello my dear brother in Christ.
I’m hoping that I misunderstand your position here. Are you saying that you view Eastern Catholicism merely as an instrument for proselytizing Roman Catholics into Orthodoxy? This would imply that true union/communion between Rome and Orthodoxy on the larger level would be completely impossible unless either one or the other Church were willing to completely forgo their unique identity.

 

[DavidKays]

I almost would like to say that your question is offensive and ignorant (oh I just said it). Do you want to see us, we Easterners, turn into puppets of Roman tradition, even though the Vatican again and again discouraged latinization and encouraged us to follow our tradition? What authority or status do you think you have to say that we, the Eastern lung of the Church of Christ, should leave if we disagree with Latin theologumena? Do you not know what we add to your church, that if it wasn’t for our Church fathers, it would have taken double the time it took to develop the teachings of the Catholic Church.

I have to say, your statement is blindly ethnocentric. keep out of the Eastern Church if you cannot survive the valid ecclesiastical diversity the Catholic church enjoys. We do not need more people coming in and enforcing their latin mentalities and traditions. The harm caused by Roman dominance resulted in enough hurt and schism, we do not need more of it (reminding everyone of the married priests crisis and the formation of the Orthodox Church of America as a schism). Also, before making false assumptions about the Eastern church, our theologumena and pious opinions (if you know what that even means) on Catholic doctrine, go STUDY it.

Servant of God
Phil

Phil, you must understand that this relationship in the beginning was different then it is today. If you study history as it seems you do then you will realize that the East had a part in the government of the church. What I am doing is bringing to light what that original relationship had and to what means for it to be restored. I am not proposing anything new. For what I am doing is declaring what it actually is. It is like Albrert Einstein’s theory of relativity. He did not discover anything new but a law that is actually in existence. What he is discovering is the mind of God for it was God who placed these laws in motion and men like Albert Einstein are here to discover them. A correct understanding of the relationship between East and West is not something new. What I am writing is what the relationship is in the eyes and heart of God. This may by what God intended for the Church in the first place and we in the last 1000 years have distorted it into something we can no longer recognize. If you studied history you will see that I am right. All of what I am proposing is not something new but a clarification of what had actually existed. If this is true then the restoration of East and West can be possible without anything else but the Holy Father to make the announcement that he will do this. That is all it will take for this relationship to be restored. The Holy Father will someday make the announcement that the Eastern Church will have her status quo back in the government of the Church. You or I or the rest will not be able to turn this back. It will be the Pope who will decide on this and if you or the rest disagree then I suspect you need time to understand what in fact the relationship between East and West really was and what God intended it to be. This relationship is just more clearly defined. That is what I have done. I have not brought out anything new but a clarification of what actually is. God Bless!

 

[Cecilianus]

DavidKays,

The relationship you just described between Orthodoxy and Catholicism is beautiful, and is the way things SHOULD be - but we need to actually follow up on that and be in communion with each other. Most Orthodox regard Catholicism as a heresy. I am an Eastern Catholic because I will not reject the validity and truth of Roman Catholicism, but rather accept both (and practice in the East). Any Orthodox who accepts the value of Roman Catholicism is, as far as I’m concerned, Catholic (Catholic in the sense of a member of the one true Church, not Roman Catholic as opposed to Eastern Orthodox). If such an Orthodox priest were to offer me Holy Communion, I would accept it. The excommunications were “lifted” (they were actually never canonically valid to begin with, for technical reasons) in 1967, so the schism should be formally over. But the bishops need to formally proclaim reunion, and this HASN’T happened yet.

 

[Cecilianus]

I am also seriously annoyed by the OP’s complaint. As a Catholic, there are certainly “Latin” things that I am not going to budge on - the absolutist Petrine view, Purgatory, and the necessity of oral confession, for example. There are some supposedly Eastern tendencies that I will never see the value of, such as a dislike for defining dogma and for clarity of thought - I see no reason to head that direction unless you are trying just to be non-Latin. And by introducing division and conflict with the West, the East is heading farther towards renewing schism rather than forging tighter bonds in order to avoid the renewal of schism.

What the East should be doing instead of complaining of Latinisms is actually becoming authentically Eastern. Instead of complaining about the Rosary - which was given to us by the Theotokos, preached by St. Seraphim of Sarov, and is perfectly fine for the faithful to say - we should start saying the Akathist again. If we don’t like the Pope throwing a Code of Canons at us, we should take the initiative ourselves and reform (by throwing out the pews and restoring Orthos, for example). Instead of finding theological problems with statues, we should restore solid iconastases. We need living water to drink - complaining that the water is Western is going to do no good if we are not going to replace the Latinizations with authentic Byzantine practice. If you don’t like confessionals, then tell your congregation to actually go to confession according to the Byzantine practice. It is better for a penitent to confess his sins the Latin way than not at all.

Western theology is good, and since truth is neither Eastern nor Western, Eastern and Western theologoumena need to be reconciled with each other. Western (Tridentine) liturgy is also good. But liturgical practices need to be done in their integrity. What Byzantines call “Latinizations” should be called modernizations - it is insulting to the West that these modernistic abuses are attributed to them, just as I find it insulting when the Novus Ordo is attributed to influences from the Byzantine Liturgy. There is nothing authentically Eastern about the Novus Ordo, even though that’s what the people who wrote it were trying to do, and there is likewise nothing authentically Western about half-hour long Liturgies.

And there are some things that were originally Roman that really should be Catholic - that is, the inheritance of the whole Church, East and West. Example: the Papacy and the College of Cardinals. I would love to see a Byzantine Patriarch elected Pope, or the Patriarch of Constantinople take his rightful place of honor as dean of the College of Cardinals. The Pope and the Princes of the Church head the entire Catholic Church, not just the West. The West has learned a lot from Eastern Christianity - all of our Marian dogmas came from the East, for example - and there is no reason why cross-fertilization should not take place.

I am not a priest, and I cannot force a parish to reform. But for all the Byzantine priests on CAF reading this, please take the following suggestions to heart:

First, restore the public practice of the Akathist, moleben, Orthros, and Vespers - and then let them keep their Rosaries and Stations of the Cross or whatever other Western devotions they want, if they still have time for them.

Sing the Liturgy more slowly, fully, and reverently (it should be two hours, after Orthros is finished), so that they get their spiritual fill. Restore the older and purer plainsong.

Teach your congregations to bow and prostate themselves and the proper times, so that genuflection will then be a less reverent gesture, rather than simply a Latin custom that we want to avoid at all costs. Remove the pews, and standing will once again have the significance it used to. If the congregation still prefers to pray on their knees, then let them have their humility.

 

[dcointin]

Cecilianus:

I appreciate your genuine desire for a reunion between the Catholic and Orthodox As an Orthodox in a serious relationship with a Catholic girl, I’m also trying to live this effort by studying the Catholic faith, attending services with her, etc., and she with me. I think that the schism between east and west is perhaps the most devastating event in church history, and directly contrary to the command of St. Paul that we be united. This is something that we all must work for, and is possible, and it begins with mutual understanding and dialogue. One area that I like to focus on is the sanctity of people in both churches. For example, I’ve been very impressed with the life of St. Padre Pio (I don’t know if he has been formally made such, but have no doubts that he is indeed a saint!), a man that cast out demons, bore the marks of his crucified Lord in his own body, and many other things. If the Catholic Church can produce men and women like him, then I cannot deny that the Holy Spirit is present there. It is in the life that theology matters, not in intellectual debates that too often are divorced from the practice of sanctification or theosis.

 

[PGhaly]

Phil, you must understand that this relationship in the beginning was different then it is today. If you study history as it seems you do then you will realize that the East had a part in the government of the church. What I am doing is bringing to light what that original relationship had and to what means for it to be restored. I am not proposing anything new. For what I am doing is declaring what it actually is. It is like Albrert Einstein’s theory of relativity. He did not discover anything new but a law that is actually in existence. What he is discovering is the mind of God for it was God who placed these laws in motion and men like Albert Einstein are here to discover them. A correct understanding of the relationship between East and West is not something new. What I am writing is what the relationship is in the eyes and heart of God. This may by what God intended for the Church in the first place and we in the last 1000 years have distorted it into something we can no longer recognize. If you studied history you will see that I am right. All of what I am proposing is not something new but a clarification of what had actually existed. If this is true then the restoration of East and West can be possible without anything else but the Holy Father to make the announcement that he will do this. That is all it will take for this relationship to be restored. The Holy Father will someday make the announcement that the Eastern Church will have her status quo back in the government of the Church. You or I or the rest will not be able to turn this back. It will be the Pope who will decide on this and if you or the rest disagree then I suspect you need time to understand what in fact the relationship between East and West really was and what God intended it to be. This relationship is just more clearly defined. That is what I have done. I have not brought out anything new but a clarification of what actually is. God Bless!

My Dear Brother, I perfectly agree with you. This is the argument made again and again by the Melkite Patriarchs throughout our history after our union with Rome in the 1729. it was the only Patriarchate that continuously resisted Roman dominance and Latinization. We are not inferiors to the latins, nor is the Bishop of Rome supreme in the sense of an absloute monarch over the church. I have been called Protestant by Latins for bringing that position up in conversation, and it is sad to see them think they have a right to remove me from Catholicism while they live in their ethnocentricity (maybe even racism), and ignorance of church history and patristics.

My response was coming to that post (quoted below) which I believe is filled with ignorance and hypocrisy. We have a proverb that says “he killed the man, then walked in his funeral.” After killing us in their crusades, making us suffer under their latinization efforts and forcing their noses in our business, and putting our Patriarch under papal nuncios and priests in honor, they are now complaining becuase we are holding to our faith and tradition. My only response… Anathema! ORTHODOXIA H THANATOC!

I am proud to be an Orthodox believer who is faithful to the ecumenical councils and the holy fathers, and in communion with the universal church of Christ. Period.

Having been in love with much of what I see in Eastern tradition, especially the Maronites, I am nevertheless frustrated by what I have come to call “closet Orthodoxy” (note the capital O) in much of Eastern Catholicism. I hear so much bashing of Western “innovations” etc. complaints of Latinization while saying the west needs to become more eastern.

My question is, why be eastern CATHOLIC at all? If you have a problem with the papacy or the ecclesiology that goes with it, why not just leave?

It seems like every time I try to get into Eastern spirituality or tradition, I hear another person denying papal primacy or questioning the dogmas proclaimed by the pope or the councils that completely turns me off.

We can’t have one group saying Mary was immaculately conceived, and one that denies it. We can’t have one group believing in purgatory (i.e. an intermediate sate where someone is made pure to enter heaven) and one that denies it. If we did, we’d be relativists.

that’s my rant for now.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

My Dear Brother, I perfectly agree with you. This is the argument made again and again by the Melkite Patriarchs throughout our history after our union with Rome in the 1729. it was the only Patriarchate that continuously resisted Roman dominance and Latinization. We are not inferiors to the latins, nor is the Bishop of Rome supreme in the sense of an absloute monarch over the church. I have been called Protestant by Latins for bringing that position up in conversation, and it is sad to see them think they have a right to remove me from Catholicism while they live in their ethnocentricity (maybe even racism), and ignorance of church history and patristics.

My response was coming to that post (quoted below) which I believe is filled with ignorance and hypocrisy. We have a proverb that says “he killed the man, then walked in his funeral.” After killing us in their crusades, making us suffer under their latinization efforts and forcing their noses in our business, and putting our Patriarch under papal nuncios and priests in honor, they are now complaining becuase we are holding to our faith and tradition. My only response… Anathema! ORTHODOXIA H THANATOC!

I am proud to be an Orthodox believer who is faithful to the ecumenical councils and the holy fathers, and in communion with the universal church of Christ. Period.

:clapping::extrahappy::extrahappy::bowdown2::bowdown:

 

[DavidKays]

My Dear Brother, I perfectly agree with you. This is the argument made again and again by the Melkite Patriarchs throughout our history after our union with Rome in the 1729. it was the only Patriarchate that continuously resisted Roman dominance and Latinization. We are not inferiors to the latins, nor is the Bishop of Rome supreme in the sense of an absloute monarch over the church. I have been called Protestant by Latins for bringing that position up in conversation, and it is sad to see them think they have a right to remove me from Catholicism while they live in their ethnocentricity (maybe even racism), and ignorance of church history and patristics.

My response was coming to that post (quoted below) which I believe is filled with ignorance and hypocrisy. We have a proverb that says “he killed the man, then walked in his funeral.” After killing us in their crusades, making us suffer under their latinization efforts and forcing their noses in our business, and putting our Patriarch under papal nuncios and priests in honor, they are now complaining becuase we are holding to our faith and tradition. My only response… Anathema! ORTHODOXIA H THANATOC!

I am proud to be an Orthodox believer who is faithful to the ecumenical councils and the holy fathers, and in communion with the universal church of Christ. Period.

Oh, I understand Phil. It is interesting that this person thinks the way he does. May by that is his problem. Too much thinking and not enough useful dialogue and reading of actual true history. By the way are you an Eastern Catholic and if so can you answer me this question. Do many Eastern Catholics feel suborinate to their Roman Catholic brethren. I mean do they have a say in the affairs of their church without the interference of Rome or do they have to be obedient to what Rome has to say. How for instance does an Eastern Catholic govern herself. Does she need the approval of Rome or does she have enough independence to govern herself. I can recall reading the Early Church when both East and West did govern their own respective territories without much interference from the other. Do you agree that the Eastern Church must have her rightful claim to be in the affairs of the church as she had in the early church. It seems to me that the Eastern Church lost that right and is trying to reclaim it. I know for instance that the Orthodox do a wonderful job in leading her children to God. The Orthodox however do not communicate much with Rome and yet we see them doing what they are always doing, leading their people into that relationship with their Lord for the benefit of His Kingdom. I wonder do the Eastern Catholics express themselves the same way and do they lead their children much the same way as do the Orthodox. When your friend said he cannot like a church that does not express herself in the same manner as his own I wonder does he really know us. I mean the Eastern Church is not contained in a paragraph or two. I wonder why our friend does not search the real truth about the East so that he can understand us better. My next door neighbour has a lot more knowledge than I have on certain issues and I do not think complaining to him that he does have the same knowledge as me will do well for our relationship. May by we should invite your friend and our friend to an Eastern Church to visit for awhile so he can see for himself our beautiful Liturgies and expressions of worship which can lift oneself to the presence of God. Our Liturgies can convert many people. I can recall Russia for instance which came to the Eastern Faith just because it witness one of our Liturgies. Thank you for your post Phil. I hope soon the East will be recognize more for what she has done and in my case I have experienced this Eastern experience to that heavenly banquet that awaits us many times teaching me that it is more important to experience God and His Delights then to read about Him. That is the greatest gift of the East. To experience God and to experience and grow into His Love. I believe we just do a better job than our Catholic brethren. God Bless!

 

[Lypher]

Sadly, many of my generation have either been absorbed into a Latin parish either through marriage or the desire to access Latin schools, or they have stopped being religious all together. That is reason enough for me to stay where I am now.

I thought that Pope Paul VI in Orientalium Ecclesiarum basically was pushing hard to save the Eastern Rites?

One final thought, I have never heard anyone suggest that the West become more Eastern, which is not to say that there are not those who think that way. My thought on that is that the removal of Latinizations in Eastern Rites can be a beneficial and good thing.

The encyclical above is supposed to do this… we are supposed to be saving the Eastern Rite of our Church. My understanding is that we have had an explosion of attendance or Easter Rite in the US. Is this not true?

Thanks.

 

[Vico]

I thought that Pope Paul VI in Orientalium Ecclesiarum basically was pushing hard to save the Eastern Rites?

The encyclical above is supposed to do this… we are supposed to be saving the Eastern Rite of our Church. My understanding is that we have had an explosion of attendance or Easter Rite in the US. Is this not true?

Thanks.

Yes, OE stipulates preservation of the Eastern Churches, and it was coded into the new Canon Law CCEO 1990. There is an obligation and right of the faithful to support their ascribed ritual church, even though faithful are going against that idea.

Sad to say, our Byzantine parish is getting smaller each year, and many members (according to our Pastor) are now attending the Latin Church nearby because of the activities and easier childcare.

 

[Cecilianus]

Cecilianus:

I appreciate your genuine desire for a reunion between the Catholic and Orthodox As an Orthodox in a serious relationship with a Catholic girl, I’m also trying to live this effort by studying the Catholic faith, attending services with her, etc., and she with me. I think that the schism between east and west is perhaps the most devastating event in church history, and directly contrary to the command of St. Paul that we be united. This is something that we all must work for, and is possible, and it begins with mutual understanding and dialogue. One area that I like to focus on is the sanctity of people in both churches. For example, I’ve been very impressed with the life of St. Padre Pio (I don’t know if he has been formally made such, but have no doubts that he is indeed a saint!), a man that cast out demons, bore the marks of his crucified Lord in his own body, and many other things. If the Catholic Church can produce men and women like him, then I cannot deny that the Holy Spirit is present there. It is in the life that theology matters, not in intellectual debates that too often are divorced from the practice of sanctification or theosis.

In that case as a Catholic I can point to the lives of St. Seraphim of Sarov, St. Sergius of Radonezh, St. Maria Skoptsova, and St. Paisius Velichkovsky, to mention only the first three that come to mind. St. Sergius of Radonezh was canonized by the Pope sometime in the 1700s, so he is a saint of the Roman Church as well (a Latin-rite priest could celebrate a Mass in his honor on his feast); almost all of the others’ feasts are celebrated in the Byzantine Catholic churches (St. Gregory Palamas, for example).

 

[Allyson]

I thought that Pope Paul VI in Orientalium Ecclesiarum basically was pushing hard to save the Eastern Rites?

The encyclical above is supposed to do this… we are supposed to be saving the Eastern Rite of our Church. My understanding is that we have had an explosion of attendance or Easter Rite in the US. Is this not true?

Thanks.

Please note that I am speaking only of my experience in the Ruthernian Rite in the US.

For the last two years I have been a Catechist in my Eastern Catholic parish in north east Pennsylvania. I have had multiple discussions with the other catechists about the size of the Eastern Christian formation program - a grand total of six students. The MAJOR reason for this is the lack of attendance by people my age - 20’s to 40’s. That is when most people are having families. They are not in the Eastern Catholic Parish either because they are not practicing Catholicism at all or they have been absorbed into a Latin parish, for reasons I think I have already discussed.

Also, my pastor has noted that we are one of the better attended parishes in the area, and that is not all that great. Unless people my age return in mass, I am not sure what the 20 years survival of the parish will be.

I think that overall, increase in attendance has been spotty in the Ruthenian Rite. That is my experience. My parish that I was at in West Virginia had a lot of infusion of young blood from the west because of its Proximity to a Catholic university. Obviously I have nothing against that, because I was Latin once. however, it is even more important that people who were born to it return to it where they can. Sometimes this is geographically impossible if they move to where there are jobs, but no EC parishes.

Just because a Pope or other Church leader has encouraged that somethings should happen, does not make that thing a reality. I think that it is safe to say that many Ruthenian parishes in the US have precipitously shrank from the time that the Pope wrote his encyclical. One of the other catechists is in her early to mid-30’s, just older than me, and many of those whom she went through catechesis with have left. In fact she is pretty sure that she is the only person here age in her family still attending any eastern parish. She herself did not go for a while.

As to the explosion of attendance: it seems to me that we have an increasing diversity of rites with each wave of immigrants, but I do not know of any explosion in attendance. Could you cite some sources? I would be interested to know more on this.

 

[Allyson]

What gets me is that, this isn’t actually the case at least with regards to 99% of the theological issues which supposedly divide us. If one is completely honest, when they study Eastern and Western beliefs one will see that actually neither holds a theology completely forgine to the other. In fact, other than with regard to the specifics of the papucy, I would say differences in theology are either manufactured or artifically made to look bigger than they are for no purpose other than keeping the churches seperate.

I would say the only issue which really requires a lot of study, prayer and dialog to resolve is the specific role of the Pope in the Church. Obviously I am not without my personal point of view on this subject, I would just say that I have faith in God. Faith enough to know we will be healed when it is appropriate. I’m very encouraged by the great thaw in dialog between east and west.

With regard to the OP, it truely saddens me that this attitude seems to exist in Eastern Catholoisim. It truely saddens me that many Easterns feel as if they can pick and choose which councils they accept, and what beliefs are purely a latin opinion. It’s correct that there is a good deal of latin opinion in a great number of our beliefs, for instance some of the specifics on the topic of purgatory. A great many others aren’t, for instance the nature of the papacy.

I agree with a lot of what say on things being out of proportion.

I do beg to differ however on you characterization of picking and choosing councils. That is not the case. The first seven big E ecumenical councils are where you have the full participation of the who Church East and West before the divide. For an Eastern Christian to say the all later councils are not wholly ecumenical in the same way is to acknowledge the truth that there was not participation by the Orthodox. In other words, this is not a form of cafeteria Catholicism, but a different historical perspective that acknowledge that much in these councils simply does not apply to the Eastern rite. Think of the liturgical reforms of Trent.

Should there be unity, maybe this would change the line up, but since much which comes out of later councils does not directly apply to the Eastern rite… I don’t think much will change on which Councils are big E ecumenical. Consider also the essentials of the faith defined in the first seven councils v. the pastoral nature of Vatican II, which really dealt with the issues of the Latin church - not the Eastern Church.