Eastern Catholicism for Dummies?

[Cristiano]

When I try to explain my point in the Traditional forum by using Eastern Christianity as an example or analogy, you tell me not to talk about Eastern Christianity there because its the Traditional Forum. Perhaps you should practice what you preach and not bring that traditionalist viewpoint here in the Eastern Catholic forum

What a burn!!!

 

[ConstantineTG]

If I’m getting better at understanding all this the Ukrainian-Greek Catholic Church that C_Alexander sent me to has the name Greek in it but that word isn’t meant to convey that the church will be full of Greek people going, "He don’t eat no meat?” like in My Big Fat Greek Wedding but that the church identifies itself as being historically associated with Greek Christian spirituality. It says on their website that the name Greek-Catholic Church was introduced by Empress Maria Theresa in 1774 in order to distinguish it from the Roman Catholic and Armenian Catholic Churches. I couldn’t see why. I wondered where “Greek” came from. But if it’s meant to be an association with Greek Christian spirituality then I might be getting it. Am I on the right track?

The origin of Byzantine spirituality is the Greek thought which is the East side of the Roman Empire.

Yes, some Byzantine Churches attached the “Greek Catholic” to distinguish themselves from “Roman Catholic”. Byzantine Catholic would also make sense but I guess at the time they adopted the name “Greek Catholic”, more people would know what it is over “Byzantine Catholic”.

I think I get that now. Byzantine is the rite but it’s also the name of your church, which church is actually Ruthenian, correct? Not that I know what Ruthenian is yet I’ve only learned the word on this thread. But how come you include “Roman Rite” in your Religion at the top right of your posts? How does Roman Rite fit in? Isn’t that the Latin Mass?

Like me, 5Loaves started as a Roman Catholic and eventually fell in love with Eastern spirituality and way of worship. If you notice my questions on this thread, I am talking about “canonical enrollment” or “ascription”. There is also a legal way to determine the sui juris Church one belongs to, usually the Church they were baptized in. But you can also inherit ascription through your parents, gain from marriage, or join through a process of writing to the Bishop.

So we’re still canonically ascribed to the Roman Catholic Church, but now go to an Eastern Catholic parish and practice Eastern Christianity. Well, I’m more in the early stages and 5Loaves is way ahead of me

 

[ConstantineTG]

What a burn!!!

I’m not trying to start a fight here, just returning the favor. The reason I get is that the Eastern perspective does not apply to the Traditional perspective. They are the “Roman Catholic Church” and not “Eastern”. Shouldn’t the same apply here?

 

[UniversalistGuy]

Like me, 5Loaves started as a Roman Catholic and eventually fell in love with Eastern spirituality and way of worship. If you notice my questions on this thread, I am talking about “canonical enrollment” or “ascription”. There is also a legal way to determine the sui juris Church one belongs to, usually the Church they were baptized in. But you can also inherit ascription through your parents, gain from marriage, or join through a process of writing to the Bishop.

So we’re still canonically ascribed to the Roman Catholic Church, but now go to an Eastern Catholic parish and practice Eastern Christianity. Well, I’m more in the early stages and 5Loaves is way ahead of me

I did notice in passing what you wrote and I tried to googling “canonical ascription” to see if I could better understand what you were talking about but the nearest I came to getting an answer was to be directed to another thread on CAF.

So what it is, then, is that if you’re born a Roman Catholic or become a Roman Catholic after you marry a Roman Catholic you can go to any Roman Catholic church and join in without anybody saying anything but if you then decide you want to regularly go to an Eastern Catholic church and eventually become an Eastern Catholic there will be some hoops to jump thru. Have I got it? Hope so.

 

[Cristiano]

I’m not trying to start a fight here, just returning the favor. The reason I get is that the Eastern perspective does not apply to the Traditional perspective. They are the “Roman Catholic Church” and not “Eastern”. Shouldn’t the same apply here?

I was not criticizing you. I was just laughing at it because I think that it was a good friendly burn. I think that your position is correct, and your comment was not nasty at all.

 

[ProVobis]

I was not criticizing you. I was just laughing at it because I think that it was a good friendly burn. I think that your position is correct

Ouch.

Nice backstabbing as I wasn’t even addressing him.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I did notice in passing what you wrote and I tried to googling “canonical ascription” to see if I could better understand what you were talking about but the nearest I came to getting an answer was to be directed to another thread on CAF.

So what it is, then, is that if you’re born a Roman Catholic or become a Roman Catholic after you marry a Roman Catholic you can go to any Roman Catholic church and join in without anybody saying anything but if you then decide you want to regularly go to an Eastern Catholic church and eventually become an Eastern Catholic there will be some hoops to jump thru. Have I got it? Hope so.

No one is really born into the Church, we are baptized into the Church. But in a sense, you do inherit your father or your mother’s ascription at least for those baptized at a younger age. For older converts, they can ascribe themselves to a Church of their choice. So a Baptist can choose to become Ukrainian Catholic and be baptized and received into that Church and not the Roman Church.

As for marriage, it can either be formal or informal. Informal means one of the spouses follows the other one’s ascription or enrollment. Formal means the spouse expresses intent to join the Church of the other and thus it would be reflected on one’s canonical records (usually the baptismal certificate).

We are free to join Eastern parishes without making the formal move. Some people feel fine without that formality. Others like me feel the necessity for it to ensure any loopholes are covered. I think a number of people here are still canonically Latin Catholics while regularly going to an Eastern Parish for a number of years.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Ouch.

Nice backstabbing as I wasn’t even addressing him.

Doesn’t matter. No offense, I know we’ve been butting heads for a while. But many threads where we do butt heads turn into “Latin vs. no-Latin” discussions, oftentimes derailing the threads. Sure, maybe its fine in the Traditional forums where that is a major concern of a great majority of the people there. But not here. There is no place for bringing that concern here and turn this thread into another “Latin vs. no-Latin” thread. In fact your post is off-topic because the thread is about “Eastern Catholicism for Dummies”. Latin doesn’t exist in Eastern Catholicsm and therefore irrelevant to this thread. We’ve already debated the Latin issue to death in the Traditional forum and the Liturgy and Sacraments forum. I just kindly ask that you don’t take that here.

 

[UniversalistGuy]

No one is really born into the Church, we are baptized into the Church.

Sorry.

But in a sense, you do inherit your father or your mother’s ascription at least for those baptized at a younger age. For older converts, they can ascribe themselves to a Church of their choice. So a Baptist can choose to become Ukrainian Catholic and be baptized and received into that Church and not the Roman Church.

As for marriage, it can either be formal or informal. Informal means one of the spouses follows the other one’s ascription or enrollment. Formal means the spouse expresses intent to join the Church of the other and thus it would be reflected on one’s canonical records (usually the baptismal certificate).

We are free to join Eastern parishes without making the formal move. Some people feel fine without that formality. Others like me feel the necessity for it to ensure any loopholes are covered. I think a number of people here are still canonically Latin Catholics while regularly going to an Eastern Parish for a number of years.

OK, thanks.

 

[5Loaves]

If I’m getting better at understanding all this the Ukrainian-Greek Catholic Church that C_Alexander sent me to has the name Greek in it but that word isn’t meant to convey that the church will be full of Greek people going, "He don’t eat no meat?” like in My Big Fat Greek Wedding…

Right. It’s full of a bunch of Ukrainians (or other folks) going “We don’t eat no meat (dairy, eggs). Is Fast now.”

…but that the church identifies itself as being historically associated with Greek Christian spirituality.

.

Historically and still associated with spirituality of the land of Byzantium, the Byzantine Empire, the Eastern portion of the Roman Empire all of which had Greek as their language in those times.

The Church in the East grew and developed from the Churches in Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria. These three Eastern centers shared a common language, Greek, and similar mode of discourse which formed the basis for the subsequent development of the Eastern Christian tradition. **The Byzantine Catholic Church shares in the inheritance of the first Greek-speaking Christian communities of the Eastern Mediterranean world, founded by the Apostles of Jesus Christ.
**

I think I get that now. Byzantine is the rite but it’s also the name of your church, which church is actually Ruthenian, correct? Not that I know what Ruthenian is yet I’ve only learned the word on this thread. But how come** you include “Roman Rite” in your Religion** at the top right of your posts? How does Roman Rite fit in? Isn’t that the Latin Mass?

My Church is actually Russian Byzantine Catholic.

The Roman Rite, Ordinary Form and Extraordinary Form, is the main liturgical Rite of the Latin Church, often called the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Rite, Ordinary Form may be celebrated in Latin and the Extraordinary Form is celbrated in Latin. Latin was the language of the Western part of that Roman Empire we were talking about where our people spoke Greek. The formal documents of the Latin (“Roman Catholic”) Church to this day are published first in Latin and then translated.

I have “and Roman Rite” in my “Religion” section here partly I am a catechist in a Latin parish in the town where I live (which is in another country and about 45 minutes drive on a good day from my Russian parish). I am a graduate of the three year non degree training program the Latin diocese sponsors to train catechists. I frequently go to daily Mass at the Latin parish where I am part of the RCIA team and where I have many good friends, or at several other near by locations, my preferred being the Dominican Priory.

If I had access to a community praying the Hours (the Priory does but I can’t quite justify the commute there several times every day) I would choose that over Mass. I think there is discussion elsewhere here at the moment about the role of daily Eucharist for EC/Orthodox. Especially since we have so many long Fasts in the East daily Mass can be an especially East/West disjoint tho I’ve become comfortable with not receiving… I don’t receive when I’m in an Orthodox Divine Liturgy so there’s another accommodation to that EC/Orthodox disjoint…

I occasionally post on topics in the other parts of the CAF, typically related to RCIA type topics. As a catechist trained in the Latin Church and serving in a Latin parish I’m very comfortable doing that. I perhaps mistakenly think that having “and Roman Rite” there will help folks know that I have a solid relationship there.

(I was exposed to the Greek Orthodox 50 years ago when my best friend’s Papou was murdered when we were young girls and his funeral was at the not yet fully completed Orthodox Ascension Cathedral I always say there were only about 8 apostles then because the iconography on the dome was not yet completed. When I was received into the Catholic Church 20+ years ago I had no idea there were Eastern Catholics. Long before and after coming into the Catholic Church I often went to Ascension Cathedral for Pascha and some other times. I still go to Ascension sometimes when it’s too difficult to get to the Russian Orthodox parish I frequent when my Russian Catholic parish doesn’t have services or when they have special services. The day I was exposed to Eastern Catholics I recognized I’d come home, tho all this can be confusing. :whacky: )

 

[ConstantineTG]

Sorry.

Don’t be. We all start from somewhere. You’re amount of curiousity on the subject is admirable. I hope more people take interest in learning about the faith and the Eastern Churches. Pope John Paul II thinks so too, he encouraged Roman Catholics to learn about the traditions of the East and be familiar with them in his Apostolic Letter, Orientale Lumen. Perhaps you should give that a read

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_02051995_orientale-lumen_en.html

 

[Aramis]

To put the advice I got from Rev. Fr. Leo Walsh, STL, Roman Priest…

“You’ll know it’s time to request the change when you get to the point you no longer think of yourself as a displaced Roman at a Byzantine parish, but a displaced Byzantine when at a Roman Parish.” I hit that point about a year before that discussion.

Just waiting on the paperwork to be finished, now. It’s out of my hands.