Do you support union of Catholic and Orthodox Churches?

[sidbrown]

In addition, there is so much overlap between the Latin doctrines and Orthodox faith that most RC’s aren’t aware of what the Orthodox truly do believe.

There is of course another problem, and that is the question as to whether or not the Orthodox are united in what they believe. For example, are the Sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church valid or not?
However, there do appear to be RC teachings which most, if not all, of the Orthodox do not accept:
the infallibility of the Roman Pope
The supreme universal jurisdiciton of the Roman Pope
Purgatory and indulgences
Imposed celibacy on the clergy (Note: the Vatican has imposed mandatory celibacy (with a few exceptions) on the Ruthenian Byxantine Catholic Church in the USA).

 

[Alexander_Roman]

There is of course another problem, and that is the question as to whether or not the Orthodox are united in what they believe. For example, are the Sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church valid or not?
However, there do appear to be RC teachings which most, if not all, of the Orthodox do not accept:
the infallibility of the Roman Pope
The supreme universal jurisdiciton of the Roman Pope
Purgatory and indulgences
Imposed celibacy on the clergy (Note: the Vatican has imposed mandatory celibacy (with a few exceptions) on the Ruthenian Byxantine Catholic Church in the USA).

Excellent questions!

With respect to the Roman Catholic Church, whether or not this or that Orthodox jurisdiction accept RC sacraments as valid or not has nothing to do with the unity of Orthodox faith. And Orthodoxy is agreed that all sacramental efficacy does depend on one’s full union and communion with the Church.

With respect to the Pope, Orthodoxy does indeed affirm that the Church, the Body of Christ, guided by the Spirit of Truth is infallible/indefectible. It affirms that the seven Ecumenical Councils, held when the entire Church was in union with Rome, expressed that infallibility. As to the role of the Pope today with respect to infallibility and jurisdiction - that is something that would be reserved to the deliberations of a future union Council between Rome and Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy never denied the First among Equals status of Rome, it never denied that Rome can act as the ultimate arbiter in issues arising within Particular Churches when it is called upon to get involved or Rome’s role in defending the faith etc.

As for Purgatory and indulgences, Orthodoxy won’t have a system of such indulgences and doesn’t use the term “Purgatory.” It maintains that souls who have died without making sufficient “works of repentance” etc. can be helped by the Church’s prayer, especially the Divine Liturgy to come closer to Christ. Orthodoxy teaches that following the forgiveness of our sins in confession, we must dedicate our lives to penance and “works of repentance” to heal our sinful inclinations and sinfulness as a whole and to restore what was harmed by our sins.

Orthodoxy prays much more for the faithful departed than the West and I, for one, am happy that my Church follows in those footsteps.

Alex

 

[DavidKays]

Hi! May I add my thoughts and agree that I do support union. I have been writing a book on this topic and I am nearly finished. It has taken me a long ride to come to the conclusions that I have written but they were worth the ride. I will state some of my conclusions here so that you may see a bit what the book is about. Basically I have come to the conclusion that we cannot stop union that is we cannot stop what God is doing. Unification will come because it will be God’s doing and not ours. No matter what we do bad or good we will not interfere what God is doing. All the mistakes in the past will not deter this. We will not alter God’s Will because the union of the 2 Churches will be of His design and not ours. You can’t stop it. It was God’s will in fact that the 2 Churches will be united soon. I will show in my thesis and arguement that the 2 Churches were not in Communion in the beginning as it was first thought. By communion I mean we were not into intercommunion with each other. We actually grew independently from each other so that God will help each one gain their individuality. In the West God helped the Church of Rome to Her growth into the individuality that will make Her up so that today She is matured to become the Church of Rome. In the East God was raising another into the individualty that makes up the Eastern Church. Today the Eastern Church has matured to become what God has been giving Her. These 2 Churches or precisely these 2 Individuals are now matured enough to enter into a relationship that God is preparing them for. I liken the 2 Churches in such a way that the Church of Rome resembles more like the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Eastern Orthodox more like the Lord Jesus Christ. More precisely the Church of Romes contains within Herself the feminine attributes of the Holy Mother and the East more the masquiline attributes of Our Lord Jesus. Simply the Church of Rome is more feminine and the Orthodox more masquiline. As the 2 Hearts of Jesus and Mary are so united so God has established the 2 hearts of His Church. one in the West and one in the East to become united. This is only an imagery of the thesis for which I am writing for the Church is the Bride of Christ but I am using imagery to explain what is happening and has been happening to our 2 Churches. God designed the 2 in this way so that eventually He will unite it. My book will show that in fact the 2 were not so united as first taught to us. We were united in our common Apostolic foundation, sacramental life and similar teachings however we were taught by that by the same Holy Spirit. It was the Holy Spirit who was bringing up these 2 and not the by each other. We were not sharing our teachings back then nor our doctrines. God had willed that both be growing independently of each other so that they both can receive their own individualities so that in the future at the time He chooses they can benefit from each others growth. This is partly what my book will say. It will say much more and hopefully convinces that this union will take place in accordance to the timetable of God. I will add that in my book no such union had occured in the beginning and that there was never a split because you cannot split something that has not been united yet.

 

[angelic06]

Mr. Kays,

This is a very interesting idea, once I’ve never heard before, about the Church in the West being akin to the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Church in the East being akin to our Lord Jesus Christ. I would like to purchase a copy of your book when it is finished and am looking forward to reading it.

Paul R. Viola

 

[DavidKays]

Thank you Paul and yes I will gladly when I have it finished to send you a copy. My book will give to the Church an explanation that will give hope and precisely great optisism for the future. I am convinced as it will say in the book that we will not be able to stop this marriage or union of our 2 Churches. Whatever tragedies and mistakes that were made in the past will not stop God from uniting His Church. This is God’s doing and not ours. The timetable of God is not dependent on man or the Church or by us. His timetable was already in place even before His Church was in place. All of our history Orthodox and Catholic will not deter His Plan of uniting us. It was in the Plan of God for us to arrive to this unity at this time that He has made. The mistakes or precisely the tragedies of the past did not change or alter His Plan of unification. For God did not unite His Church as yet. His Church was not united as we thought as in the beginning but growing and maturing to the states they are today so that He will enable this union to take place. It was always in the timetable of God for the moment of unification to take place much later than let us say in the beginning stages of the Churches. Nothing and I mean nothing and no one can stop this process to take place. As I said earlier that God had to in time developed the Church of Rome liken to the Heart of His Beloved Mother and to the Eastern Church liken to the Sacred Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ. These union then of the 2 Hearts of our Churches will then resemble the union of the 2 Hearts of Jesus and Mary. The 2 Churches had to grow first into those 2 Hearts before God can unite them. In some way we got it all wrong. That was OK because God does not explain everything as it was in the beginning. What I propose in my book is this thesis so as to better explain what God Was Doing and not explain what we were doing. My explanation is more the discovery of what God is thinking. It is like the Theory of Relativity when Albert Einstein mentioned before his discovery when he said " I want to know his thoughts how He created the universe. So I too wanted to know His Thoughts and so I came out with this theory. It has great hope that God will do this in accordance to His Timetable and not ours. Thank you again for your interest. Many Catholics on the Island also support me and to the conclusions that I have made.

 

[priestswife]

Jesus prayed that we may all be one

How about we start with a practical change- Christmas on Dec. 25th and Easter calculated the “Orthodox” way- they do this in Romania- it is beautiful when all Christians are celebrating together:thumbsup:

 

[DavidKays]

I like to point out that the 2 Churches originated from the beginning and have become witnesses of God to the world. I will also like to point out that in my book I will propose a different intrepretation to Revelation 11 concerning about the 2 witnesses. I could not understand how 2 men can be called by God to defeat evil. What will they be doing, riding the planes every half hour. Then it dawn to me. Why can’t the witnesses be the Church or precisely the Catholic and Orthodox Church. They have been around for over 2000 years and have given great witness for God with their blood and their lives. I can’t see God calling men from the past. I can’t see a blast from the past. But I do see the Church today at it was for over 2000 years bearing witness to Jesus at times with her blood and at times just by witnessing. I will say that when the times become bad enough God may call witnesses from both Churches, Catholic and Orthodox to help Him defeat evil. I will suggest if people are called in the future to help the Church then God will call certain individuals from both East and West to encounter the evil present in the world. The Church does encounter evil at every time but there may be a time when God may need specifically more help and He will get it from certain people from both Churches. The reason I have come to this conclusion comes the scripture itself for it says that these are the ones who are the 2 olive trees and the 2 lamps that stand before the Lord. What can that refer to is the celebration of the True Light of our Lord in Holy Mass and the Divine Liturgy. At every hour the celebration of the Mass or the Divine Liturgy is made throughout the world. So the Catholic and Orthodox Churches become the 2 olive trees and the 2 lamps. May by at a time in the future God will specifically call out witnessess from these 2 Churches to battle with the ernormous amount of evil and disbelief. Then the 2 witnesses can be alot more than 2 a way lot more and this better helps me to accept it because I do not think that 2 men can do the job. Again I believe in the union of our 2 Churches as I said earlier and this part from Revelation somehow gives it credance. My book is almost completed. My book will not talk so much as what we did in the last 2000 years but it will be more centered on what God is doing. It is a mystical book to interpret hopefully what I believe were misinterpretations of the past. It will bring out more clarification and it will be different. I liken to it as a common sense approach. I like watching those CSI shows and someone commented to me once we have a CSI in Charlottetown. A Common Sense Investigator. Basically that is my approach just good old common sense. My writings will only bring a better understanding with a different approach that hopefully will help the Church better understand Her condition to see clearly what the future will bring.

 

[5Loaves]

How about we start with a practical change- Christmas on Dec. 25th and Easter calculated the “Orthodox” way- they do this in Romania- it is beautiful when all Christians are celebrating together:thumbsup:

I’m all for it, Matushka. Our parish calendar follows this practice.
It’s a bit odd on those years when Pascha comes in May (especially when we’re on two calendars and Pascha falls a month apart on the two.)

 

[ddarko]

I think for a reunion, Orthodox must accept all teachings of the Latin church. Period!

There is no point in compromising doctrines and dogmas anyway. Compromising would be same as forfeiting that either church is not guided by the holy spirit to be infallible which destroys Christianity. So it’s not logically possible for either church to compromise. One can only admit that one is wrong and join the other. So the union of a “middle ground” nature, while easier and quiet possible to achieve is worthless because it destroys the basis of the church of Christ.

Whether the orthodox or Catholics like it or not, the harsh truth is that one of us is wrong and the other is right. I for one believe the Orthodox are wrong from my personal studies on the subject and so I choose to be Roman Catholic.

To give an analogy, to reunite with atheists, one can’t make concessions. Either the atheist realizes his position is wrong or not. We can’t take the stance that both of us might be in error and somewhat right. Similarly, neither church can unite in a way which one arrives at a “middle grounds” on ones doctrine or Dogma. To do so would be to compromise truth it-self.

The correct thing to do is to humbly study and pick the right church, whether you are originally from the Latin or Orthodox church. That is the kind of self-reflection that will unite all followers of Christ. Any discussion of leaders of the church for a reunion is only a very small part of that process. The big responsibility lies in each of the followers of each church. It always comes down to the person’s choice to believe or disbelieve.

But thats just my two cents

God Bless

 

[Alexander_Roman]

I think for a reunion, Orthodox must accept all teachings of the Latin church. Period!

There is no point in compromising doctrines and dogmas anyway. Compromising would be same as forfeiting that either church is not guided by the holy spirit to be infallible which destroys Christianity. So it’s not logically possible for either church to compromise. One can only admit that one is wrong and join the other. So the union of a “middle ground” nature, while easier and quiet possible to achieve is worthless because it destroys the basis of the church of Christ.

Whether the orthodox or Catholics like it or not, the harsh truth is that one of us is wrong and the other is right. I for one believe the Orthodox are wrong from my personal studies on the subject and so I choose to be Roman Catholic.

To give an analogy, to reunite with atheists, one can’t make concessions. Either the atheist realizes his position is wrong or not. We can’t take the stance that both of us might be in error and somewhat right. Similarly, neither church can unite in a way which one arrives at a “middle grounds” on ones doctrine or Dogma. To do so would be to compromise truth it-self.

The correct thing to do is to humbly study and pick the right church, whether you are originally from the Latin or Orthodox church. That is the kind of self-reflection that will unite all followers of Christ. Any discussion of leaders of the church for a reunion is only a very small part of that process. The big responsibility lies in each of the followers of each church. It always comes down to the person’s choice to believe or disbelieve.

But thats just my two cents

God Bless

An even harsher truth is that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches share essentially the same Apostolic faith but express it differently in accordance with their respective and legitimate theological/spiritual traditions. The only real “sticking point” is the issue of authority - which is not an insuperable obstacle, given that the two were united for about a thousand years.

If anything, it was the Latin Church that “added” things to the original deposit of faith unilaterally and then demanded the East submit to them.

But when we look closer at the things the Latin Church added, we see that the Orthodox have always believed them (i.e. the sinlessness of Mary, her assumption into heaven, prayer for the faithful departed that they might be loosed from their sins etc.).

So there is no need to impose Latin (scholastic) theology on the Patristic East.

And Rome herself rejects outright your model of church “reunification” which has been called “uniatism.”

That is no longer on the ecumenical table (good riddance, this Eastern Catholic says). Triumphalism of any brand serves no good purpose.

Alex

 

[5Loaves]

I think for a reunion, Orthodox must accept all teachings of the Latin church. Period!

We Eastern Catholics AKA Orthodox in communion with Rome, are not required to accept all the teachings of the Latin Church. However, we may not call them heretical.

 

[ddarko]

An even harsher truth is that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches share essentially the same Apostolic faith but express it differently in accordance with their respective and legitimate theological/spiritual traditions. The only real “sticking point” is the issue of authority - which is not an insuperable obstacle, given that the two were united for about a thousand years.

If anything, it was the Latin Church that “added” things to the original deposit of faith unilaterally and then demanded the East submit to them.

But when we look closer at the things the Latin Church added, we see that the Orthodox have always believed them (i.e. the sinlessness of Mary, her assumption into heaven, prayer for the faithful departed that they might be loosed from their sins etc.).

So there is no need to impose Latin (scholastic) theology on the Patristic East.

And Rome herself rejects outright your model of church “reunification” which has been called “uniatism.”

That is no longer on the ecumenical table (good riddance, this Eastern Catholic says). Triumphalism of any brand serves no good purpose.

Alex

Hey hey,

First calm down. I am not out to criticize your church. Your tone seems to indicate that you are rather upset about what I said. I was simply pointing out the illogical nature of any church making compromises on its Dogma and Doctrine.

Thus, either the latin church accepts that it is wrong and embraces the orthodox or vice versa is the only true unification. Anything other than that is just a temporary arrangement which could look like they are together again but not really.

The problem you have is that you don’t want to admit that you are wrong or that I am wrong. But that’s just a problem with human nature. That is after-all why people tend to love pluralism.

Therefore, in the case of a true unification, the followers of the wrong church MUST convert to the other. I obviously don’t mean forcefully here. I mean it in a personal sense. Just as a protestant converts to Catholicism, or an Atheist to Theism. That does require true humility on the part of the believer and probably won’t happen that easily but that is what is required. The compromises do not make logical sense and in fact, undermines each church for the sake of pluralism. Thus it is not an answer that the Orthodox or the Latin church should try to embrace.

In my case, as someone who believes from my personal studies that the church of Rome is the true church, I would make the statement that the Orthodox should one day become Roman Catholics. I do think the Orthodox church is not the True church. This is not to call you a heretic but just say what I stand for.

Now about the allegation about the church of Rome adding to the deposit of faith, keeping it the same does not mean your church is correct either. In fact, given that your church is NOT the true church, I would look at it as a good thing that you guys didn’t add much to your deposit of faith. After-all, there is no guarantee of infallibility

Your hesitancy to admit that one of us is wrong is therefore purely psychological. The true way forward is not to say that ‘‘we are both right in our own way so let’s try to reach some middle ground’’. Rather, you have to be humble enough to explore which option is correct yourself. That is the question a protestant, an anglican, a Orthodox, a Roman Catholic, a Muslim or even an Atheist must answer in his own way.

This being said, just to make my position clear, disciplinary matters can be compromised since they are not teaching. I am specifically referring here to the compromise of doctrine and dogma.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

We Eastern Catholics AKA Orthodox in communion with Rome, are not required to accept all the teachings of the Latin Church. However, we may not call them heretical.

Sure. I am not really sure about the extent to which you apply the teachings here though. I do not think a church who for an example allows divorce or contraception should be allowed to be in communion with the church of Rome. But if it’s with respect to disciplinary matters like celibate priests, then I see no problem.

So as I said, I feel that this is really not a true reunification. I only look at it as a stepping stone for a greater purpose. After all, it’s like having Orthodox in communion with Rome but we really won’t allow Roman Catholics to live that way.

After all, how can one part of the church be in true unification with the rest of the church if it does hold contradictory teachings (again, just to stress, I don’t mean to teaching on disciplinary matters)? I am sure some people in the church would still consider it as unified, but I am just pointing out that it doesn’t sound too logical.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

Hey hey,

First calm down. I am not out to criticize your church. Your tone seems to indicate that you are rather upset about what I said. I was simply pointing out the illogical nature of any church making compromises on its Dogma and Doctrine.

Thus, either the latin church accepts that it is wrong and embraces the orthodox or vice versa is the only true unification. Anything other than that is just a temporary arrangement which could look like they are together again but not really.

The problem you have is that you don’t want to admit that you are wrong or that I am wrong. But that’s just a problem with human nature. That is after-all why people tend to love pluralism.

Therefore, in the case of a true unification, the followers of the wrong church MUST convert to the other. I obviously don’t mean forcefully here. I mean it in a personal sense. Just as a protestant converts to Catholicism, or an Atheist to Theism. That does require true humility on the part of the believer and probably won’t happen that easily but that is what is required. The compromises do not make logical sense and in fact, undermines each church for the sake of pluralism. Thus it is not an answer that the Orthodox or the Latin church should try to embrace.

In my case, as someone who believes from my personal studies that the church of Rome is the true church, I would make the statement that the Orthodox should one day become Roman Catholics. I do think the Orthodox church is not the True church. This is not to call you a heretic but just say what I stand for.

Now about the allegation about the church of Rome adding to the deposit of faith, keeping it the same does not mean your church is correct either. In fact, given that I believe your church is NOT the true church, I would look at it as a good thing that you guys didn’t add much to your deposit of faith. After-all, there is no guarantee of infallibility

Your hesitancy to admit that one of us is wrong is therefore purely psychological. The true way forward is not to say that ‘‘we are both right in our own way so let’s try to reach some middle ground’’. Rather, you have to be humble enough to explore which option is correct yourself. That is the question a protestant, an anglican, a Orthodox, a Roman Catholic, a Muslim or even an Atheist must answer in his own way.

This being said, just to make my position clear, disciplinary matters can be compromised since they are not teaching. I am specifically referring here to the compromise of doctrine and dogma.

God Bless

 

[Shiranui117]

Hey hey,

First calm down. I am not out to criticize your church. Your tone seems to indicate that you are rather upset about what I said. I was simply pointing out the illogical nature of any church making compromises on its Dogma and Doctrine.

Thus, either the latin church accepts that it is wrong and embraces the orthodox or vice versa is the only true unification. Anything other than that is just a temporary arrangement which could look like they are together again but not really.

The problem you have is that you don’t want to admit that you are wrong or that I am wrong. But that’s just a problem with human nature. That is after-all why people tend to love pluralism.

In my case, as someone who believes from my personal studies that the church of Rome is the true church, I would make the statement that the Orthodox should one day become Roman Catholics. I do think the Orthodox church is not the True church. This is not to call you a heretic but just say what I stand for.

Now about the allegation about the church of Rome adding to the deposit of faith, keeping it the same does not mean your church is correct either. In fact, given that your church is NOT the true church, I would look at it as a good thing that you guys didn’t add much to your deposit of faith. After-all, there is no guarantee of infallibility

…You DO realize that he’s Eastern Catholic and not Orthodox, right? I honestly can’t tell if you got that…

 

[ddarko]

…You DO realize that he’s Eastern Catholic and not Orthodox, right? I honestly can’t tell if you got that…

Actually I didn’t . Thanks for pointing that out. I just went by the tone of his reply because it seemed like he was upset on what I said.

I was just trying to make the point that I am against any church being called “reunited” to the Roman Catholic church if it holds contradictory positions on matters taught in doctrine and Dogma. Because to do so, logically invalidates both churches.

Same would go for the Orthodox church as well.

Disciplinary matters on the other hand are not a problem.

God Bless

 

[5Loaves]

I would make the statement that the Orthodox should one day become Roman Catholics. I do think the Orthodox church is not the True church. This is not to call you a heretic but just say what I stand for.

We Eastern Catholics are not Roman Catholics.

I don’t know what “contradictory positions on matters taught in doctrine and Dogma” you are referring to.

I encourage you to listen to the Catherine Alexander’s interview with Father Maximos of Holy Resurrection Romanian Catholic Monastery on “Who are Eastern Catholics?” and with Father Abbot Nicholas on Eastern Catholic Theology.

I believe you’re new to the EC section so you would do well to look through some of the threads here and become a little bit familiar with us, our relationship to the Orthodox, our relationship to the Latin Church, etc.

Also of interest might be some of the documents from the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation found here and here.

I hope you will make the effort to learn more about us.

 

[piltdown_man]

…I just went by the tone of his reply because it seemed like he was upset on what I said.

I wonder why? Maybe it was the artless way in which you began your post?

“I think for a reunion, Orthodox must accept all teachings of the Latin church. Period!”
~ddarko

 

[ddarko]

We Eastern Catholics are not Roman Catholics.

I don’t know what “contradictory positions on matters taught in doctrine and Dogma” you are referring to.

I encourage you to listen to the Catherine Alexander’s interview with Father Maximos of Holy Resurrection Romanian Catholic Monastery on “Who are Eastern Catholics?” and with Father Abbot Nicholas on Eastern Catholic Theology.

I believe you’re new to the EC section so you would do well to look through some of the threads here and become a little bit familiar with us, our relationship to the Orthodox, our relationship to the Latin Church, etc.

Also of interest might be some of the documents from the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation found here and here.

I hope you will make the effort to learn more about us.

For sure. Thanks for the resources.

About what I said, I was not charging that your church was being contradictory to Dogma and Doctrine. I am afraid you missed the point and misinterpreted me in the process. I clearly said that I wasn’t sure in what context you mean “teachings”.

On the contrary, I was simply pointing out that I would be against any such church that DOES hold contradictory positions being called “in union” with the the RC church. It seems logically inconsistent to do so. That claim has nothing to do with my knowledge on the Eastern Catholic Church and is a general claim as far as I can see.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

I wonder why? Maybe it was the artless way in which you began your post?

“I think for a reunion, Orthodox must accept all teachings of the Latin church. Period!”
~ddarko

Hey,

What can I say, I like to open strong There is no point in beating around the bush. I just replied to what I thought is the way to a union (which seemed to be the question of the poll).

But anyway, I think my point is clear. To compromise, makes the position of both church’s invalid. We can have a “union” for sure but it won’t be a true one.

To call and atheist to unite or a muslim to unite with a church is rather pointless if the goal is to meet him halfway and strike a compromise as to what he should believe. I am simply of the position that in the end, either the persons of each church makes a honest decision through self-reflection to convert or the rest will just be empty actions that might do more harm than good.

That might be a bit strong but that is what I believe

God Bless