) or is it considered Western Christianity because it’s in communion with Rome (Western Christianity)?East and West came from the divide of the Roman Empire.Is Eastern Catholicism considered Eastern Christianity because of its Eastern traditions (and name
Personally I consider it western, because of it’s communion with Rome.Is Eastern Catholicism considered Eastern Christianity because of its Eastern traditions (and name
Communion has nothing to do with it. The empire was divided East and West, West is the Latin half and East is the Greek half. The philosophy, the understanding, the culture, is distinct between the two halves. To call Eastern Catholics “Western” is a great disservice to the Greek roots of the Eastern faith these Churches possess.
They gave up a lot of their connection with Eastern Christianity when they accepted the teachings of Rome. Easternness is rooted in the beliefs not just the practices. They have accepted the Western Christian beliefs of Rome.
ITAEither something is orthodox or it is not.
In Christ,
Andrew
Of course Eastern Catholics claim to be orthodox. But the Orthodox wouldn’t agree. Its a no-win situationFrom my sinful perspective, I think the whole notion of classifying “East and West” is just plain silly. This idea of geographicalism is a sideshow. Either something is orthodox or it is not.
In Christ,
Andrew
We would say that many of your rites and traditions are have their roots in Orthodoxy, but ultimately you all are not. Similarly, the Latins would say the same to an Anglo-Catholic.Of course Eastern Catholics claim to be orthodox. But the Orthodox wouldn’t agree. Its a no-win situation
We have accepted only what is our common universal Faith according to the Fathers. But our theologies and spiritualities are unique. Don’t confuse the one, universal Faith with the different theologies, which are the expressions of the one Faith unique to each praticular Tradition or Church.
That is why Eastern Catholics feel very slighted. They’re not Roman Catholics, but they’re also not Orthodox. So where are we? Ritual limbo?We would say that many of your rites and traditions are have their roots in Orthodoxy, but ultimately you all are not. Similarly, the Latins would say the same to an Anglo-Catholic.
Though, we do pray for the union of all.
In Christ,
Andrew
This! So this.I think the whole notion of classifying “East and West” is just plain silly. This idea of geographicalism is a sideshow. Either something is orthodox or it is not.
LOL. But thats that thing, we’re the ones who are creating limbo here. We believe that the unity of the Church hinges on communion with the successor of Peter, yet we value the traditions handed we had shared with the Orthodox. Its important that the Eastern Catholics carry a distinct identity from the Roman Catholics, because this is something we need to convey to the Orthodox for what they will expect in a unified Church.Constantine: You’re asking an Orthodox Christian to endorse “limbo”?
In that case, perhaps we could say purgatory…so far you’re at +/- 1000 years for the “filioque” clause alone…best not to support too much else if you can help it, eh?
The problem is that many EO today believe their Eastern expression of the Faith is the ONLY orthodox expression of the Faith.From my sinful perspective, I think the whole notion of classifying “East and West” is just plain silly. This idea of geographicalism is a sideshow. Either something is orthodox or it is not.
Geographically, it came from the East, but it’d be Orthodox if it came from Scandinavia or South Africa or Mongolia. Its geographical location should not determine whether the Faith is Orthodox or not.
No one size fits all here.I’m talking about theology, not mere geographical presence or outward liturgical variances in different countries. The EOC only has ONE expression of the Faith (i.e., theology), unlike the Catholic and Oriental Orthodox Churches.Geographically, it came from the East, but it’d be Orthodox if it came from Scandinavia or South Africa or Mongolia. Its geographical location should not determine whether the Faith is Orthodox or not.
Plus, there is more than one expression in Orthodoxy. I don’t quite understand the criticism from the RCC in this regard. Orthodoxy in Greece is expressed differently from how it is in Palestine, to how it is in Romania, to how it is in Russia, to how it is in Ghana, to how it is in Japan, to how it is in America, etc. We also make use of old Sarum, Celtic, Gallican, Mozarabic and Roman liturgies. Those are different expressions as well.
It’d be most interesting, as well!Geographically, it came from the East, but it’d be Orthodox if it came from Scandinavia or South Africa or Mongolia. Its geographical location should not determine whether the Faith is Orthodox or not.
In Christ,
Andrew
Not true, as I already illustrated above. Theology is not “Eastern” or “Oriental” (which etymologically means the same thing as Eastern, hence my annoyance with this silly distinctions. LOL) or “Western.” It is either Orthodox or it is not. Period.
The lines between the Non-Chalcedonian Orthodox and the Chalcedonian Orthodox are not as fine as you might like to admit, too. Many from both sides see the other as Orthodox, as do many of our bishops and synods. The only thing separating us from full communion is that we have been separate more than we have been united, unfortunately. But the Lord’s will be done!