Eastern Catholic vs Eastern Orthodox?

[scameter18]

Other than the obvious difference, that the Eastern Catholic Church submits to the authority of the Pontiff of Rome and the Orthodox does not, could someone describe to me the other differences between the Eastern Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church? This can include theology, liturgy, ecclesial differences, or anything else that seems most significant. Thanks a lot, I’m very curious about this topic as I have great respect for the Eastern Orthodox but I know even less about the Eastern Catholic Church. Thank you all and God bless.

 

[jimmy]

Ideally there is no difference. The Melkites made a statement at one of their councils recently that they believe all that the Orthodox believe, except they are in communion with the bishop of Rome.

 

[Anthony86]

Ideally there is no difference. The Melkites made a statement at one of their councils recently that they believe all that the Orthodox believe, except they are in communion with the bishop of Rome.

Could you provide a link to that statement? I’d be very interested in reading it.

 

[twf]

Ideally there is no difference. The Melkites made a statement at one of their councils recently that they believe all that the Orthodox believe, except they are in communion with the bishop of Rome.

I think one obvious exception would ecclesiastical second marriages…the Melkite Church doesn’t grant ecclesiastical divorces nor confern the mystery of matrimony upon previously divorced persons. Of course, the Orthodox Churches didn’t permit ecclesiastical second marriages until much later in Church history either (even if civil marriages were tolerated after appropriate penance)… Arguably this is a matter of discipline rather than a matter of faith?

 

[Schism_hater]

Ideally there is no difference. The Melkites made a statement at one of their councils recently that they believe all that the Orthodox believe, except they are in communion with the bishop of Rome.

If that were the case, I would be Eastern Catholic, but it simply doesn’t work. The Orthodox believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father alone. To be in communion with Rome, one must accept the dogmatic declarations of the councils of Lateran IV, Lyons and Florence, which state that the Spirit proceeds eternally and equally from the Father and the Son as from one principle. There is no way to reconcile those two positions.

 

[Madaglan]

Other than the obvious difference, that the Eastern Catholic Church submits to the authority of the Pontiff of Rome and the Orthodox does not, could someone describe to me the other differences between the Eastern Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church? This can include theology, liturgy, ecclesial differences, or anything else that seems most significant. Thanks a lot, I’m very curious about this topic as I have great respect for the Eastern Orthodox but I know even less about the Eastern Catholic Church. Thank you all and God bless.

The theology is pretty much the same when it comes to the common Patristic heritage. Many modern Orthodox theologians are highly critical of Western theology as it has developed, even going so far as to accuse heresy. Eastern Catholics are, in general, better disposed to Western theological developments, and understand them as professing the same truths as the East, although in different expressions.

Liturgically, the differences often depend on the church. In the Eastern Orthodox Church, there are even some basic differences between the Byzantine/Greek expression and the Russian expression. In the Byzantine/Greek celebration of Divine Liturgy, the priest will proceed around the nave during the Great Entrance. In the Russian celebration of Divine Liturgy, the priest directly walks before the Royal Doors. In the Byzantine/Greek tradition, Orthros (Matins) is prayed immediately before the Divine Liturgy on Sunday, whereas in the Russian tradition (at least as I have experienced it in America), Vespers is held Saturday evening, and 3rd and 6th hours are read immediately before Divine Liturgy on Sunday. I wish I could say where the various Eastern Catholic churches fall in relation to the Orthodox churches. It seems to me that most of the Eastern Catholic churches (Ruthenian, Ukrainian, Melkite) generally tend to draw more from Byzantium than from Moscow.

 

[Sophronius]

What is the history of the second and third marriages in the Orthodox Church?

I have been hard pressed to get a straight answer. But it seems the Empress Irene was married thrice and that was before the Great Schism. What are the roots of this teaching? And how did the Byzantine Church develop it into separate rites of the Holy Mystery of Matrimony?

 

[Rawb]

There’s the issue of canonical ethnic division in the Eastern Catholic churches that isn’t present in the Orthodox also. In Byzantine (and Roman too, actually) Catholicism one inherits their Rite from their father. Even if they go to a parish of a different Rite they still abide by the practices of the Rite they canonically inherited into. In Orthodoxy one just follows the practice of whichever parish they’re attending, and can change parishes for whatever reason and whenever they want. A Serbian can start going to Greek and the only persons that have to be told are the priests, and that’s just a practical matter so Priest A isn’t wondering “Where’s Sam gone?” and Priest B realizes he’s now spiritually responsible for Sam.

If one wants to change Rites in your church there’s a lengthy process involving bishops and a lot of paperwork, from what I understand.

 

[jimmy]

Look up the Zoghby Initiative.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Other than the obvious difference, that the Eastern Catholic Church submits to the authority of the Pontiff of Rome and the Orthodox does not, could someone describe to me the other differences between the Eastern Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church? This can include theology, liturgy, ecclesial differences, or anything else that seems most significant. Thanks a lot, I’m very curious about this topic as I have great respect for the Eastern Orthodox but I know even less about the Eastern Catholic Church. Thank you all and God bless.

As others have said, the ideal is that nothing else is different. The reality, however, is that some/many elements - varying by location and jurisdiction - will be latinized in Eastern Catholic Churches.

I think one obvious exception would ecclesiastical second marriages…

Ah, yes, good point!

There’s the issue of canonical ethnic division in the Eastern Catholic churches that isn’t present in the Orthodox also. In Byzantine (and Roman too, actually) Catholicism one inherits their Rite from their father. Even if they go to a parish of a different Rite they still abide by the practices of the Rite they canonically inherited into. In Orthodoxy one just follows the practice of whichever parish they’re attending, and can change parishes for whatever reason and whenever they want. A Serbian can start going to Greek and the only persons that have to be told are the priests, and that’s just a practical matter so Priest A isn’t wondering “Where’s Sam gone?” and Priest B realizes he’s now spiritually responsible for Sam.

If one wants to change Rites in your church there’s a lengthy process involving bishops and a lot of paperwork, from what I understand.

Actually, I don’t think it’s that different. Yes, switching membership to a different self-governing Catholic church is “a lengthy process involving bishops and a lot of paperwork,” but you don’t have to do that. One can be a member of a parish belonging to another ritual church without actually transferring to that ritual church.

If that were the case, I would be Eastern Catholic, but it simply doesn’t work. The Orthodox believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father alone. To be in communion with Rome, one must accept the dogmatic declarations of the councils of Lateran IV, Lyons and Florence, which state that the Spirit proceeds eternally and equally from the Father and the Son as from one principle. There is no way to reconcile those two positions.

“There is no way to reconcile those two positions.”

Says some guy on the Internet.

Many scholars disagree.

Catholic bishops and theologians maintain that the filioque clause, properly interpreted, does no violence to the monarchy of the Father.

 

[Anthony86]

If that were the case, I would be Eastern Catholic, but it simply doesn’t work. The Orthodox believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father alone. To be in communion with Rome, one must accept the dogmatic declarations of the councils of Lateran IV, Lyons and Florence, which state that the Spirit proceeds eternally and equally from the Father and the Son as from one principle. There is no way to reconcile those two positions.

As I understand it, reconciliation is possible by understanding the procession from the Son as something granted to the Son by the Father (‘given all power on heaven and in earth’); so in a sense, the Spirit proceeds from the Father, and in another, it proceeds from Father and Son. This is close (if not identical) to the expression ‘proceeding from the Father through the Son’, which is ancient and can be found among the Fathers. In any case, a solution of this sort would uphold the monarchy of the Father and the filioque.

 

[Rawb]

Actually, I don’t think it’s that different. Yes, switching membership to a different self-governing Catholic church is “a lengthy process involving bishops and a lot of paperwork,” but you don’t have to do that. One can be a member of a parish belonging to another ritual church without actually transferring to that ritual church.

Yeah, but like I said, you’d still be bound by the rules for your canonically enrolled church.

In Orthodoxy say I’m going to a Serbian parish (which I am) which is on the Old Calendar (which it is). If I go to the Greek parish down the street on the New Calendar I start fasting by the New Calendar. In other words the major Feast Days change, the start of Fasting seasons change, etc. That’s ok, I just start fasting when everyone in my Greek parish starts fasting. I’ve known at least one woman who did all of exactly this.

But if I’m a Serbian Catholic (don’t think that’s the actual term but close enough) and I start going to a Byzantine Greek Catholic Parish, I am still bound to follow the fasting schedule of the Serbian Catholic church. If I go to a Latin parish I have to observe the midnight to Eucharistic fast on Sundays even though almost nobody else is in my parish. I still have to fast Wednesday and Friday and, from what I’ve heard, the major feasts are Holy Days of Obligation in Eastern Catholicism, so I’d have to attend Mass on those days even if the rest of the parish isn’t celebrating the feast on that day.

It’s just a difference, like the OP was asking about.

 

[Cavaradossi]

As I understand it, reconciliation is possible by understanding the procession from the Son as something granted to the Son by the Father (‘given all power on heaven and in earth’); so in a sense, the Spirit proceeds from the Father, and in another, it proceeds from Father and Son. This is close (if not identical) to the expression ‘proceeding from the Father through the Son’, which is ancient and can be found among the Fathers. In any case, a solution of this sort would uphold the monarchy of the Father and the filioque.

We would disagree. If the Son is granted the Father’s hypostatic property of causality, then this confuses the hypostatic properties of the Father and the Son. If the Son causes the Spirit as a different secondary cause than the Father, then this would imply that there is a double procession from two principles (a view rejected both by the Latin West and the Greek-speaking East).

 

[Nine_Two]

Look up the Zoghby Initiative.

The Zogby initiative is an ideal in an unideal world, and only applies to the Melkites.

 

[ComeHome2Rome]

Other than the obvious difference, that the Eastern Catholic Church submits to the authority of the Pontiff of Rome and the Orthodox does not, could someone describe to me the other differences between the Eastern Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church? This can include theology, liturgy, ecclesial differences, or anything else that seems most significant. Thanks a lot, I’m very curious about this topic as I have great respect for the Eastern Orthodox but I know even less about the Eastern Catholic Church. Thank you all and God bless.

Mount Athos! There is only an Orthodox presence there.

 

[Vico]

Other than the obvious difference, that the Eastern Catholic Church submits to the authority of the Pontiff of Rome and the Orthodox does not, could someone describe to me the other differences between the Eastern Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church? This can include theology, liturgy, ecclesial differences, or anything else that seems most significant. Thanks a lot, I’m very curious about this topic as I have great respect for the Eastern Orthodox but I know even less about the Eastern Catholic Church. Thank you all and God bless.

There are 22 eastern Catholic churches that have been established. Since they derive from different traditions you would need to consider the liturgical, disciplinary, hierarchical, and theological differences expressed in them to the Eastern Orthodox (and to cover them all, with the Assyrian Church of the East and the six Oriental Orthodox churches).

 

[jimmy]

The Zogby initiative is an ideal in an unideal world, and only applies to the Melkites.

Every ideal exists in an unideal world.

 

[Nine_Two]

Every ideal exists in an unideal world.

And I can only think of one ideal that was ever fulfilled - By God no less.

 

[jimmy]

And I can only think of one ideal that was ever fulfilled - By God no less.

True. What is your point though? Are you saying they aren’t Orthodox? That is true.

I would say that the Zoghby initiative is flawed in that the Orthodox are the ideal they are trying to imitate. Rather than being true to who they are, they are trying to be true to the Orthodox. Either they should join the Orthodox or accept their position as a seperate entity.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Yeah, but like I said, you’d still be bound by the rules for your canonically enrolled church.

In Orthodoxy say I’m going to a Serbian parish (which I am) which is on the Old Calendar (which it is). If I go to the Greek parish down the street on the New Calendar I start fasting by the New Calendar. In other words the major Feast Days change, the start of Fasting seasons change, etc. That’s ok, I just start fasting when everyone in my Greek parish starts fasting. I’ve known at least one woman who did all of exactly this.

But if I’m a Serbian Catholic (don’t think that’s the actual term but close enough) and I start going to a Byzantine Greek Catholic Parish, I am still bound to follow the fasting schedule of the Serbian Catholic church. If I go to a Latin parish I have to observe the midnight to Eucharistic fast on Sundays even though almost nobody else is in my parish. I still have to fast Wednesday and Friday and, from what I’ve heard, the major feasts are Holy Days of Obligation in Eastern Catholicism, so I’d have to attend Mass on those days even if the rest of the parish isn’t celebrating the feast on that day.

It’s just a difference, like the OP was asking about.

I’m pretty sure you could get a dispensation to follow the calendar and rules of the parish you’re a member of. I don’t know how complicated or simple it would be, though.