Do you support union of Catholic and Orthodox Churches?

[sidbrown]

I’m not arguing that Orthodoxy is “Catholic”, and I agree that to say so would only be a confusion of the two churches and a denial of the legitimate differences between us. What bothers me is that you seem to see Orthodoxy and any other Christian church, or any other religion, as virtually the same thing, not Catholic, with no distinction between them. For example, you said “I agree that there can be closeness but it’s the same as what I would say is the closeness between Catholicism and Judaism”. My point is that the Catholic Church itself views Orthodoxy as unique and affirms its orders, sacraments, etc. as valid in a way that does with almost no other church, and this is the basis for our ecumenical dialogue. You seem to see no need for this dialogue at all, just convert from Orthodoxy to Catholicism if you agree with it, or vice versa. I think this attitude is terribly unfortunate, and again doesn’t recognize the unity that we once shared, and could again in the future.

The Roman Pontiff, Pope John Paul II says that the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church are Sister Churches:
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3700
Do you agree with the declaration of the Pope or not?

 

[dcointin]

The Roman Pontiff, Pope John Paul II says that the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church are Sister Churches:
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3700
Do you agree with the declaration of the Pope or not?

Yes, I do.

 

[ddarko]

I’m not arguing that Orthodoxy is “Catholic”, and I agree that to say so would only be a confusion of the two churches and a denial of the legitimate differences between us. What bothers me is that you seem to see Orthodoxy and any other Christian church, or any other religion, as virtually the same thing, not Catholic, with no distinction between them. For example, you said “I agree that there can be closeness but it’s the same as what I would say is the closeness between Catholicism and Judaism”. My point is that the Catholic Church itself views Orthodoxy as unique and affirms its orders, sacraments, etc. as valid in a way that does with almost no other church, and this is the basis for our ecumenical dialogue. You seem to see no need for this dialogue at all, just convert from Orthodoxy to Catholicism if you agree with it, or vice versa. I think this attitude is terribly unfortunate, and again doesn’t recognize the unity that we once shared, and could again in the future.

Ok I think this comes from where you think the conversion should begin.

First, I do agree that Orthodox have a special closeness to us. They have sacramental validity that most would not have. But I do not think that alone says much. Can we after all say the same about Roman Catholic breakaway groups? Some of them have ordained priests and bishops. This is why I categorize Orthodox in a group similar to that of Judaism or Islam with only the added value that due to the closeness, there is more possibility of conversion back or to the right faith.

I am of the attitude that it should happen at a personal level. I keep hearing people saying “Oh I hope they get together etc.” But the heart of the matter is, if you want to unite, the path is simple. You go back to the drawing board and reflect as to which church is correct. Both church’s are obviously not correct. I find it ironic that followers of both church’s put the responsibility on the Pope or a Patriarch. The action to unite lies within you. No need to rely on others decisions.

As I said, Orthodox allows Divorce and birth control. The R.Catholic church doesn’t. Only one of them is right on the matter. Since it does involve a matter of salvation, I am not so sure that it can be brushed aside as a minor difference. To me this is similar to other religions in that sense. It is incomplete. The closeness as I said would only reflect the increased possibility of a conversion from each to the other.

I understand a psychological motivation for a recognizing a unity we once shared but as I asked you before, if a group of Roman Catholics decided to do away with some doctrine, lets say ordain women priests, there would certainly be a unity we once shared but does it really matter anymore? Is ecumenical dialog the correct thing to do in such an event or is it not better to have a reflection by members on each side of the fence as to which is correct and logically consistent?

I am of the position that its the reflection that’s important. At the end of the day its the individual that makes the choice. A protestant church would not exist if the members of the church decided to convert to Catholicism. There would certainly be unity and it’s not brought about by two leaders having discussion. This is why I really think that this business of “uniting” outwardly is more of a stepping stone at best when real uniting and embracing of the truth can only come at a personal level.

God Bless

 

[sidbrown]

Ok I think this comes from where you think the conversion should begin.

I am of the attitude that it should happen at a personal level. I keep hearing people saying “Oh I hope they get together etc.” But the heart of the matter is, if you want to unite, the path is simple. You go back to the drawing board and reflect as to which church is correct. Both church’s are obviously not correct. You can’t put that responsibility on the Pope or a Patriarch. The action to unite lies within you.

As I said, Orthodox allows Divorce and birth control. The R.Catholic church doesn’t. Only one of them is right on the matter. Since it does involve a matter of salvation, I am not so sure that it can be brushed aside as a minor difference.

I understand a psychological motivation for a recognizing a unity we once shared but as I asked you before, if a group of Roman Catholics decided to do away with some doctrine, lets say ordain women priests, there would certainly be a unity we once shared but does it really matter anymore? Is ecumenical dialog the correct thing to do or a personal reflection by members on each side of the fence as to which is correct?

I am of the position that its the personal reflection that’s important. At the end of the day its we who make the choice. This is why I really think that this business of “uniting” outwardly is more of a stepping stone at best when real uniting and embracing of the truth can only come at a personal level.

God Bless

The Pope has already said that the RC and the EO are Sister Churches.

 

[ddarko]

The Pope has already said that the RC and the EO are Sister Churches.

What does that even mean apart from the idea that “yes we are pretty close to each other in most things”? I don’t think the claim is that “we are both correct” because as I pointed out, on Divorce and birth control, we hold opposing views.

And I am really not sure how you would categorize Roman Catholic breakaways due to disagreement with some Catholic doctrine. Do you call them son and daughter churches? If so, what does it even mean in this context anyway?

I think the core idea behind this uniting business is correct. There is a recognition implicitly that there is only one church of Christ and this division somehow means something is not right. But on the other hand, there is no logical reason for people to wait for their leaders to bring about a “union”. The correct thing to do is to reflect at an individual level as to which is the correct church. Anything less is people taking lack of responsibility for their choice of religion and waiting for others to do the job.

What would you say if the Muslim friend you try to convert tells you that he will wait for his imam to try and unite with the Church first before accepting the Christianity?

Or if the protestant friend tells you that he is waiting for his pastor to talk something out with the church first?

God Bless

 

[Mike_Barberena]

When the RC Church calls a church that is not Catholic, “Sister” it is meant with respect and love, and it truly means on the similarities of their views to others and the Catholic faith. The term does not mean Catholic, stay positive on the good stuff and slowly we can call others sisters in the name of Jesus and Mary…

In the name of conversion, it is up to the individual be the person Atheist, or Muslim or Whatever…

Thanks and Remain Blessed

 

[sidbrown]

When the RC Church calls a church that is not Catholic, “Sister” it is meant with respect and love, and it truly means on the similarities of their views to others and the Catholic faith. The term does not mean Catholic, stay positive on the good stuff and slowly we can call others sisters in the name of Jesus and Mary…

What does that even mean apart from the idea that “yes we are pretty close to each other in most things”? I don’t think the claim is that “we are both correct” because as I pointed out, on Divorce and birth control, we hold opposing views.

Pope John Paul II has also said that the Church breathes with two lungs. One lung is the RC and the other is the EO. Do you agree with this papal declaration that the Church breathes with two lungs?

 

[Mike_Barberena]

Yes, I do, to the point that the Pope is Jesus representative.
The EO only needs to fully be in with us, and due to the EO
Situation they have a recourse that will bring them in, the ball
is in their court to be fully united.

 

[Mike_Barberena]

Pope John Paul II has also said that the Church breathes with two lungs. One lung is the RC and the other is the EO. Do you agree with this papal declaration that the Church breathes with two lungs?

“Yes, I do, to the point that the Pope is Jesus representative.
The EO only needs to fully be in with us, and due to the EO
Situation they have a recourse that will bring them in, the ball
is in their court to be fully united.”

as for their doctrine,yes there are differences that need to be corrected. And yes, I agree with you on the RC being the One and True Church. Upon they joining the Catholic Church and adapt the True doctrines, they will no longer be our sister church, they will be part of the SAME body…
Thanks and Remain Blessed

 

[Triciacat]

In the Divine Litugy of St. John Chrysostom, Orthodox Christians pray “for the welfare of the holy churches of God and for the union of all,” and we ask the Lord to “fulfill the petitions of we Thy servants as may be expedient for us; granting us in this world the knowledge of Thy truth…” In The Lord’s Prayer, we all pray, “Thy will be done.” We must believe that God will acheive His will, in His time, and in His way, even if that is in eternity.

Sorry to quote myself again, but I am still wondering about the answer to my original question posted some time ago, that being whether or not Catholics, in their mass, pray for unification the way Orthodox Christians do. Are there any specific petitions to this effect?

 

[sidbrown]

“Yes, I do, to the point that the Pope is Jesus representative.
The EO only needs to fully be in with us, and due to the EO
Situation they have a recourse that will bring them in, the ball
is in their court to be fully united.”

as for their doctrine,yes there are differences that need to be corrected. And yes, I agree with you on the RC being the One and True Church. Upon they joining the Catholic Church and adapt the True doctrines, they will no longer be our sister church, they will be part of the SAME body…
Thanks and Remain Blessed

I don’t think that the Orthodox accept universal papal jurisdiction as they are fearful that this would give the Roman pontiff too much power over them. I don;t think that they would want to submit to the Vatican in matters of Liturgy for example, as many of them do not look too kindly upon the way that the New Mass has been celebrated and the way that many of the Roman Catholic Churches have been stripped down to make them more modern. They prefer their old ways.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Dear Friends,

First of all, I would like to know what, in your view, the Orthodox need to “correct” about what they believe?

As for their “old ways” - I take it you mean the ancient Patristic and liturgical traditions of the East?

Why would anyone want to change that?

Perhaps there are also things that Roman Catholicism could “correct” and learn from the Orthodox East.

Things such as having a better mystical sense of the liturgy, trying not to change the liturgy by way of an agenda that wants to “update” and keep up with “contemporary times.”

Christians aren’t called upon to adapt to contemporary times. They are called upon to witness to Christ and His Apostolic Church IN contemporary times.

Roman Catholicism has had so many problems of late precisely because it doesn’t know where it should stand to make it more “relevant” to modernity.

Roman Catholicism would gain much if it took some cues from Orthodoxy on spirituality and also on faith matters. The Orthodox believe today as all Christians believed in the first millennium, save for the issues that arose at the point of separation that was solidified in 1204.

Also, Roman Catholicism should really learn to differentiate between what is “of the Faith” and what is “of the Latin Catholic tradition.” I think the distinctions are blurred, and have been, Vatican II notwithstanding.

Orthodoxy will NEVER allow itself to be controlled by a Vatican department on the liturgy etc.

Heaven forbid!

Roman Catholicism could develop a better appreciation today for “vertical spirituality” (which already exists in the Tridentine tradition). Fasting should never be replaced by works of charity - charity is also important, but fasting is critically important to the spiritual life.

There is so much that modern Roman Catholicism can and needs to correct and improve on . . .

The post-Vatican II “improvements” also need revisiting. As one person once said, “You’ve improved it worse.”

Alex

 

[Alexander_Roman]

“Yes, I do, to the point that the Pope is Jesus representative.
The EO only needs to fully be in with us, and due to the EO
Situation they have a recourse that will bring them in, the ball
is in their court to be fully united.”

as for their doctrine,yes there are differences that need to be corrected. And yes, I agree with you on the RC being the One and True Church. Upon they joining the Catholic Church and adapt the True doctrines, they will no longer be our sister church, they will be part of the SAME body…
Thanks and Remain Blessed

Dear Mike,l

Which “true doctrines” do the Orthodox need to adopt (apart from the issue of the authority of the Pope which is tied in with the Churches’ state of mutual separation)?

And your expression that the Pope is Jesus’ representative is, right away, something Orthodoxy rejects - they affirm that such a statement could only be made if it can be shown that Jesus is not with His Church, in which case, He would require a representative.

One problem I find, and I’m not saying this to you, is that Roman Catholics, especially on this board, seem to be more familiar with Mormon doctrines than with the Orthodox Church.

(It seems that there is way too much time and energy expended on CAF on discussions about Mormonism.)

We all need to take some time and study what Orthodoxy teaches to get a clearer understanding of what it believes and that it isn’t simply a matter of Roman Catholicism minus a number of “true doctrines.”

Alex

 

[yaHalyna]

I have spoken to both Eastern Catholic priests and Orthodox priests about this and consulted Pope John Paul II’s catechism.
The Catechism: JP2 says that the orthodox are “our brothers in faith”. Their priests are taught and administer the sacraments the same as the Eastern Catholics do. He did say that though we consider their sacraments valid, we should not “seek them out”, in other words, if you can’t get to a catholic church, its ok to go to an orthodox church.
The EC priests I spoke to about this agreed, however it was the Orthodox priests who did not. They explained to me that there were 3 issues of faith that the Catholics would have to accept (and I’m sorry to say I dont remember them all now), but one was “proceeds from the Father and the Son” in regards to the Holy Spirit - he said that means he is not One with God. I was also told that according to his Bishop, we can attend the Divine Liturgy in the Orthodox church but that the Bishop does not allow the priests to administer the sacraments (confession, communion, etc) to non-Orthodox.

Researching further, we say that the Orthodox split from the Catholic church, but the Orthodox say the Catholic broke away “from the one true church”.
I am not wise enough to determine who is right.

PS: I find it odd that no one has mentioned the churches views on divorce & remarriage. The Orthodox priest gave me several examples including the 2 First Women (Lilith & Eve), the 2 different accounts of God’s creation of women.

 

[ddarko]

Dear Mike,l

Which “true doctrines” do the Orthodox need to adopt (apart from the issue of the authority of the Pope which is tied in with the Churches’ state of mutual separation)?

And your expression that the Pope is Jesus’ representative is, right away, something Orthodoxy rejects - they affirm that such a statement could only be made if it can be shown that Jesus is not with His Church, in which case, He would require a representative.

One problem I find, and I’m not saying this to you, is that Roman Catholics, especially on this board, seem to be more familiar with Mormon doctrines than with the Orthodox Church.

(It seems that there is way too much time and energy expended on CAF on discussions about Mormonism.)

We all need to take some time and study what Orthodoxy teaches to get a clearer understanding of what it believes and that it isn’t simply a matter of Roman Catholicism minus a number of “true doctrines.”

Alex

I would like to see the Orthodox accept the indissolubility of marriage (no divorce) and correct it’s teachings on birth control.

Right now, that is priority. If not, Orthodox church position is sinful.

About the papacy, your position is logically inconsistent. If you take the presence of Jesus in the sense you mention it, he is present everywhere in every religion and church. That is not the same thing we mean when we say the Pope is the Vicar of Christ.

God Bless

 

[sidbrown]

I would like to see the Orthodox accept the indissolubility of marriage (no divorce) and correct it’s teachings on birth control.

Right now, that is priority. If not, Orthodox church position is sinful.

About the papacy, your position is logically inconsistent. If you take the presence of Jesus in the sense you mention it, he is present everywhere in every religion and church. That is not the same thing we mean when we say the Pope is the Vicar of Christ.

God Bless

But the Roman Catholic Church has easy to get marriage annulments. In 1929, there were about 10 marriage annulments granted in the USA. In recent years, the number of marriage annulments granted has dramatically increased in some years to more than 60,000 per year in the USA. That is quite an increase, which is reflective of the loosening up of the criteria to obtain the annulment.

 

[ddarko]

But the Roman Catholic Church has easy to get marriage annulments. In 1929, there were about 10 marriage annulments granted in the USA. In recent years, the number of marriage annulments granted has dramatically increased in some years to more than 60,000 per year in the USA. That is quite an increase, which is reflective of the loosening up of the criteria to obtain the annulment.

Though that might be the case, you might be misunderstanding what an annulment is and what a divorce is. Annulment can ONLY be allowed if there was no marriage in the first place.

Now there are always going to be people who abuse it just like any other thing. This is why the current Pope himself asked the Roman Court to be on the side of truth when it comes to granting annulments than on a emotional basis. But anyways, the difference between a marriage and an annulment is incomparable. The main point is that though people might abuse it, the church’s teaching on the matter are correct. I wish I could say the same about the Orthodox church’s position on this.

God Bless

 

[Gregory_I]

Uh, the Orthodox Church’s position on Birth Control:

First of all, which church? The Old Calendarists, the New Calendarists, the Serbians, THe Ecumenical patriarchate, the Orthodox Church of Greece?

Second, the DAMITTED CONSENSUS OF THE ORTHODOX is that contraception IS NOT NORMAL OR IDEAL FOR ANY ORTHODOX BELIEVER.

However, they do leave the decision making to the individual with the guidance of a spiritual adviser.

Also, the Orthodox Cannot obtain a marriage annulment the way a Roman Catholic can, because the sacramental theology of marriage is slightly different.

In the Roman Catholic church the sacrament is administered by the individuals with the Church’s minister as a witness.

Therefore, any defect in sacramental form or matter or intent rests in the individuals being married: If someone was forced to appear against their will, the marriage was not Valid because there is a defect of intent. Hence, they can get an annulment.

In eastern theology however, which is also Catholic theology, the PRIEST administers the sacrament to the individuals, who basically don’t say a word the entire service. They are literally joined together by the Priest, acting on behalf of the Bishop who is the Ikon, or image of Christ.

THEREFORE, how can there be room for an anullment in eastern theology? The defect would have to lie in The PRIESTS intention, or form, or matter, because it is the PRIEST who confers the sacrament.

Therefore, the Orthodox church, implicitly acknowledges this by allowing divorce according to the words of Christ: “Marital unfaithfulness.” and Pauls words: “But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace.”

THink about it.

 

[Triciacat]

I would like to see the Orthodox accept the indissolubility of marriage (no divorce) and correct it’s teachings on birth control.

Right now, that is priority. If not, Orthodox church position is sinful.

Glory To Jesus Christ! May He Be Glorified Always!

Divorce is allowed in the Orthodox church, yes, but it is considered a grievous sin. “Allow” does not mean “advocate.” “It is not the free will of the marriage partners that establishes the marriage, but the grace of God in particular which is essential.” (His Grace Athenagoras, Bishop of Sinope.) Please refer to Malachi for scripture regarding the holiness and indissolubility of marriage. “Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” (Mark 10:9, Matthew 19:6) “I hate divorce,” says the Lord God of Israel…" (Malachi 2:16) God is asking us that if we are joined together in marriage, that we do everything in our power to stay together. This is the perfect holy ideal and a request from God. When this ideal is presented with the fallibility and sin of man, his thoughts and actions are what constitute the divorce. Man can use his free will to end his marriage, but this is a sin. However, the Orthodox church, unlike the Catholic church, recognizes, with loving kindness and mercy, that “since Christ…allowed an exception regarding the indissolubility of marriage, the Orthodox church also is willing to allow an exception.” (Bishop Kallistos Ware, concerning Matthew 19:9) An important distinction is when “Christ teaches that marriage may not be dissolved, that does not mean that He is stating that it cannot occur. The completeness of the marriage relationship can be tainted by erroneous behavior. It is the offence that breaks the bond.” (Bishop of Sinope) The Orthodox church wisely recognizes that in some cases the marriage is already sinful and dissolved and remaining in such a state can lead to the loss of one’s soul. 2 Corinthians commands us to separate ourselves from sin. Divorce is tragic and a sin, but just as Jesus Christ repeatedly shows us kindness and mercy despite our sinful nature, so does the Orthodox church.

 

[ddarko]

Glory To Jesus Christ! May He Be Glorified Always!

Divorce is allowed in the Orthodox church, yes, but it is considered a grievous sin. “Allow” does not mean “advocate.” “It is not the free will of the marriage partners that establishes the marriage, but the grace of God in particular which is essential.” (His Grace Athenagoras, Bishop of Sinope.) Please refer to Malachi for scripture regarding the holiness and indissolubility of marriage. “Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” (Mark 10:9, Matthew 19:6) “I hate divorce,” says the Lord God of Israel…" (Malachi 2:16) God is asking us that if we are joined together in marriage, that we do everything in our power to stay together. This is the perfect holy ideal and a request from God. When this ideal is presented with the fallibility and sin of man, his thoughts and actions are what constitute the divorce. Man can use his free will to end his marriage, but this is a sin. However, the Orthodox church, unlike the Catholic church, recognizes, with loving kindness and mercy, that “since Christ…allowed an exception regarding the indissolubility of marriage, the Orthodox church also is willing to allow an exception.” (Bishop Kallistos Ware, concerning Matthew 19:9) An important distinction is when “Christ teaches that marriage may not be dissolved, that does not mean that He is stating that it cannot occur. The completeness of the marriage relationship can be tainted by erroneous behavior. It is the offence that breaks the bond.” (Bishop of Sinope) The Orthodox church wisely recognizes that in some cases the marriage is already sinful and dissolved and remaining in such a state can lead to the loss of one’s soul. 2 Corinthians commands us to separate ourselves from sin. Divorce is tragic and a sin, but just as Jesus Christ repeatedly shows us kindness and mercy despite our sinful nature, so does the Orthodox church.

Um, I disagree.

First where does Christ give exceptions to Divorce? Are you talking about the adultery case? If so, your interpretation is incorrect and incompatible with rest of scripture and is therefore invalid.

Second, yes, sin can be forgiven by God, BUT that does not mean you can get divorced??? What on earth does that even mean? Can I kill someone too? I mean, God is going to forgive me right? Maybe I should put an upper-bound on that, two kills allowed per life time

One of the signs for repentance is making amends to the sins you did. You cannot just say, oh well I divorced, lets go to confession and now marry my new wife. You are not only making marriage in to a joke, you are also making forgiveness of sins in to a joke.

So no, the Orthodox church is very very wrong in this case. Marriage, a bond created in front of God cannot be dissolved. Christ said so himself. I am really not sure about what exception you refer to. As I said before, if you are referring to Matthew 19:9 with the adultery business, your interpretation is incorrect.

In short, the Orthodox church is going above Christ’s words. I really don’t see how you justify allowing divorce and I assure you, I am really willing to hear your position so please do present your defence if you have one.

God Bless