Considering conversion to Eastern Catholicism

[ziapueblo]

I had never heard of different types of Catholicism before ! Wow! I’d love to learn more

The Catholic Church is made up of 24 sui juris or particular Churches that have their own hierarchy. The largest is the Latin Church or what most people call the Roman Catholic Church. The other 23 Churches are Eastern Churches that belong to one of five different rites. A Church, such as the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, is a community of believers. A rite, for example Byzantine, is how the faithful express their faith (liturgy theology, etc.). So the Melkite Greek Catholic Church is a particular, sui juris, Church that belongs to the Byzantine rite. The 23 Eastern Churches are in communion with Rome. Notice communion with Rome and not united with Rome.

Most Eastern Catholic Churches have a mother Orthodox Church or counterpart. The Melkite’s and the Antiochian Orthodox Church, the Romanian Greek Catholic Church and the Romanian Orthodox Church or the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church and ACROD (not a mother Church but a counterpart).

As Eastern Catholics we are called by Rome to live out our ancient ecclesiastical heritage. So in other words, we are Orthodox in communion with Rome.

Hope this helps. There are others on this forum that are much more knowledgable and will correct any of my mistakes

ZP

 

[halogirl]

That’s amazing thank you so much x

 

[Masihi]

I live in Saudi currently.

 

[cathapolo]

And how much do you know about the Maronites and their history to make that statement?

 

[Vico]

The Antiochian Orthodox Church. The Melkite Catholic Church is it’s equivalent in Catholicism. …

Also from the See of Antioch is the Maronite Catholic Church and the Syrian Catholic Church. The Melkites are really in the See of Constantinople now (Byzantine), although originally from Antioch.

 

[dochawk]

Most Eastern Catholic Churches have a mother Orthodox Church or counterpart. The Melkite’s and the Antiochian Orthodox Church,

In most cases, the Orthodox church is the mother church–but not in the case of the Melkites.

In the Melkite case, the newly elected Patriarch re-estableshed communion with Rome. There was an irregularity, as the two remaining bishops consecrated a third in order to hold the election.

The Patriarch f Constantinople then sent non-melkite bishops to hold a synods (also completely irregular), who purported to elect a different patriarch, creating the Antiochian Orthodox Church.

These two churches get along remarkably well, and there is ongoing drift of parishioners back and forth. Last I heard, they are now only jointly building churches. Intercommunion is more common than anyone wants to admit.

Also, the entire Melkite hierarchy has offered to resign in favor of their Orthodox counterparts in the interest of re-establishing communion.

The Melkites are also the source of the “Zogby initiative” (roughly, “I believe everything taught by the Orthodox Church, and also that we have an obligation to be in communion with the Bishop of Rome.”)

the Romanian Greek Catholic Church and the Romanian Orthodox Church

Those are another pair that get along particularly well. A couple of years ago, their Patriarchs stood side by side as they blessed the waters at Theophany).

[quote[or the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church and ACROD (not a mother Church but a counterpart).
[/quote]

ACROD broke off for the Ruthenians in the US as a direct consequence or a pig-headed and bigoted RCC bishop. Roughly half the churches and parishioners went with each (and there were years of bitter litigation about the church properties).

The same bishop whose name I refuse to repeat is directly responsible for the creation of the OCA, under shockingly similar circumstances (He told the widowed Ruthenian Catholic priest, a former seminary rector, that he wasn’t Catholic. When Fr. Toth replied that he was, and presented the letter from his bishop, the response was, “he’s not Catholic, either.”)

(so, yes, a single bishop’s bigotry created not one but two Orthodox churches . . .)

hawk

 

[Masihi]

A lot actually.

 

[Vico]

…

We know that the earliest Provincial Councils of Baltimore (ten total: 1829-1869) established a canon law for the particular church in the USA which forbade the practice of any liturgical rites aside from the Latin. This was approved by the Vatican.

 

[ziapueblo]

Thanks for clearing things up! My thoughts did not come out well in the written form

ZP

 

[dvdjs]

ACROD broke off for the Ruthenians in the US as a direct consequence or a pig-headed and bigoted RCC bishop. Roughly half the churches and parishioners went with each (and there were years of bitter litigation about the church properties).

The schism that led to the formation of the ACROD occurred nearly twenty years after the death of Bishop John Ireland (and nearly thirty years after the death of Fr Alexis Toth). I am not sure what unnamed “pig-headed and bigoted RCC bishop” you were thinking of, but if it was Ireland, then you are flatly wrong.

 

[dvdjs]

We know that the earliest Provincial Councils of Baltimore (ten total: 1829-1869) established a canon law for the particular church in the USA which forbade the practice of any liturgical rites aside from the Latin

Do you documentation for this idea?

 

[Vico]

Vico:

We know that the earliest Provincial Councils of Baltimore (ten total: 1829-1869) established a canon law for the particular church in the USA which forbade the practice of any liturgical rites aside from the Latin

Do you documentation for this idea?

Archdiocese of Baltimore
“The first six provincial councils, like the synod of 1791, were national in character because Baltimore was the only archdiocese in the Republic.” – https://www.archbalt.org/the-synods-and-councils-of-baltimore-1791-1884/

There were also Plenary sessions in 1852, 1866 and 1884.

Catholic Encylopedia, from The First Plenary Council of Baltimore (1852)

2. The enactments of the seven provincial councils of Baltimore are obligatory for all dioceses of the United States.
3. The Roman Ritual, adopted by the First Council of Baltimore, is to be observed in all dioceses, and all are forbidden to introduce customs or rites foreign to the Roman usage. Sacred ceremonies are not to be employed in the burial of Catholics whose bodies are deposited in sectarian cemeteries; or even in public cemeteries, if there be Catholic cemeteries at hand.
4. The Baltimore “Ceremonial” is to be used all through the country.
…
9. European priests desiring to be received into an American diocese must have written testimonials from their former bishops and the consent of the ordinary here.

In sending the pope’s approval of these decrees, the prefect of the Propaganda exhorted the bishops to add the feasts of the Circumcision of Our Lord and the Immaculate Conception B.V.M. to the festivals already observed. He added that although some diversity as to fasts and feasts is found in the American dioceses, still it is not desirable to lessen the number in those places where they are in accord with the discipline of the universal Church, because fewer feasts are observed in other American dioceses. The bishops are not to labour for conformity among the dioceses in customs that are foreign to the discipline of the universal Church, for thus the appearance of a national Church would be introduced.

Nihil Obstat. 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Fanning, W. (1907). Plenary Councils of Baltimore. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02235a.htm

 

[dvdjs]

Thanks @Vico.

Give the date, this seems to be a matter of establishing and upholdng a uniform practice and calendar within the RCC in America, rather than allowing for divergent practices among RCCs from various places. The substantial immigration of Greek Catholics laity and clergy to serve them occurred decades later. This clause may have been used against them, but the major issue the bemused the RC bishops was the married men in the presbyterate.

 

[dochawk]

On further review, you are correct. I’m mixing up his abuses and the schisms his bigotry caused and contributed to . . .

 

[Vico]

Thanks @Vico.

Give the date, this seems to be a matter of establishing and upholdng a uniform practice and calendar within the RCC in America, rather than allowing for divergent practices among RCCs from various places. The substantial immigration of Greek Catholics laity and clergy to serve them occurred decades later. This clause may have been used against them, but the major issue the bemused the RC bishops was the married men in the presbyterate.

The Vatican did not allow priests with families to relocate to other countries. Now Pope Leo XIII in 1894 gave the Encyclical Orientalium dignitas however there was no eastern jurisdiction established in the USA until St. Pope Piux X gave the apostolic letter Ea Semper in 1907 and established an auxilliary bishop for the Ukrainian Catholics. There was an ordinariate established later, but it was not until 1924 that there were Apostolic Exarchs of United States of America installed for both (one each) the Ukrainians and Ruthenians. The Metropolitan churches were established in 1958 (Ukrainian - Metropolitan of Philadelphia) and 1969 (Ruthenian - Metropolitan of Munhall).

 

[dvdjs]

On further review, you are correct. I’m mixing up his abuses and the schisms his bigotry caused and contributed to . . .

The issues were largely the same, and both involved contentious litigation - so it is easy to mix. But the people were different, as were the impacts.
Toth was the only clergy who went to the proto-OCA - three others left, including his brother, but they returned.
The Chornock schism, IIRC, involved ~ 40 parishes and their clergy.

 

[dvdjs]

The Vatican did not allow priests with families to relocate to other countries.

This is all some time after the Baltimore gatherings.

Apart from married priests, and Ireland famously refused a widower priest. When our own bishops were installed, they ordained married men until Cum Data Fuerit, (1929). That provoked the Chornock schism. it took another 75 plus years for us to be able to return to our tradition.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

The Vatican did not allow priests with families to relocate to other countries.

This is all some time after the Baltimore gatherings.

Apart from married priests, and Ireland famously refused a widower priest. When our own bishops were installed, they ordained married men until Cum Data Fuerit, (1929). That provoked the Chornock schism. it took another 75 plus years for us to be able to return to our tradition.

The jurisdiction was Latin so the others would be suffragan.

The greatest Rusyn immigration was 1880s to 1914. The Baltimore Plenary sessions were in 1852, 1866, and 1884.

 

[dvdjs]

The jurisdiction was Latin so the others would be suffragan.

The jurisdiction was Latin until Greek-Cathoic ordinaries - not suffragan to any Latin bishop - were appointed.

he Baltimore Plenary sessions were in 1852, 1866, and 1884.

The session you quoted was 1852.

 

[Masihi]

I think this thread went off topic.