EC / EO a question

[twf]

Even for those far outside of the Bolshevik or Russian expansionist empire, Rome has always been good about presenting them with an alternative to whatever power struggle they might be dealing with, provided via union with Rome. Look up the history of the beginnings of the Chaldean Catholic Church. In 1552, one Youhannan Salaqa was involved in a succession dispute within the CoE (different patriarchs for different regions, etc.), and effectively “solved” it by going to Rome to be ordained, thereby effectively starting the Chaldean Catholic Church via that union. This is generally how it goes: Somebody, somewhere would rather be a Patriarch in a newly-created Rome-affiliated Church than be whatever it is they were already in their non-Catholic church, and ta-da! An Eastern/Oriental Catholic Church is born.

Sorry if that sounds cynical, but that’s the history as it stands in most cases.

Hasn’t virtually every schism from or to any communion also had a political side? That’s the reality of the human condition. That being said, in the case of the Melkites, I think a pretty good case could be made that the legitimate Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, and those loyal to him, entered into full communion with Rome - while Constantinople, in violation of Orthodox canons, artifically created a new Orthodox counterpart church… But you’re right that in most cases the reverse was true.

 

[dzheremi]

Yes, all schisms have political aspects to them. I’m just saying that Rome has been particularly good at exploiting them over the centuries.

 

[Denho]

Yes, all schisms have political aspects to them. I’m just saying that Rome has been particularly good at exploiting them over the centuries.

Rome had to have something to do to occupy her time. It must be tiresome having so little to do when you aren’t living with your neck under the boot of Islam.

 

[Schism_hater]

There were martyrs on both sides and the history is tragic.

The communists took our churches and gave them to the Orthodox. When the post-communist courts ruled that our churches had to be returned to us, the Orthodox, in many cases gutted and destroyed them. This is in the last 15 years, not really even yet history.

Catholics have also behaved badly throughout history as well, there is no doubt.

This is just part of the brokenness of humanity. Only the Holy Spirit can bring about the healing that we need, but we must cooperate with faith and good will toward one another.

:clapping:

 

[ConstantineTG]

Rome had to have something to do to occupy her time. It must be tiresome having so little to do when you aren’t living with your neck under the boot of Islam.

Well, the fast secularization and then subsequent Islamization of Western Europe will give them something to occupy their time.

 

[dzheremi]

Islamification or not, from talking to various friends from different countries in Europe, I would think that the biggest issue for the RC over there is just getting people to listen to them. Faith is part of the old of life, and they’ve ‘progressed’ beyond it, mostly.

Granted, this is against the background of growing Orthodox churches in Western Europe, often as a result of the new reality of the Middle Eastern Christian diaspora (see the video in my sig, for instance) but also taking in converts (see: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate, French Coptic Orthodox Church, etc.; also, the guy posted the YT video in my sig is a convert to the Syriac Orthodox Church), the majority of which we can assume are probably ex-Anglican or ex-Catholic, if only culturally. So I agree that the religious landscape appears to be changing in Europe (and over the world), but that’s not all negative, since not everyone is either becoming a Muslim or an atheist.

 

[Schism_hater]

I just want to add to this thread that it is time to try to let go of all past wrongs, on both sides. As an Orthodox, I will say it is time for my brothers to try to let go of 1204 and 1439. When non-Christians hear the gosple message of forgiving past wrongs, what must they think when those who call themselves Christians cannot or don’t even try to do that with regard to fellow Christians? There are significant doctrinal issues, but we need to let go of historical grievances.

 

[dzheremi]

Amen. While the particular dates you mentioned don’t hold much relevance for the OO, one could get a sense reading through various entries in our synaxarium that we have some relatively legitimate (or at least understandable) grievances to be leveled against the Byzantines/EO, but I’m happy to report that such conflict rarely surfaces these days, even though we’re just as out of communion today as we were then (though when the synaxarium was written down these were more like current events, or at least in the more recent past than they are now). While nobody is rushing to reestablish communion (and I think this is a good thing), there is an increased understanding these days, borne out of the theological dialogues began informally in the 1960s and formally in the late 1980s, of what it is that actually separates us (OO and EO), and what can and should be forgiven most readily as a part of healing historical wounds and divisions. We still have a long way to go, but I hope that this dialogue can also inspire EO and RCs, too, in their own ecumenical meetings.

 

[theistgal]

I just want to add to this thread that it is time to try to let go of all past wrongs, on both sides. As an Orthodox, I will say it is time for my brothers to try to let go of 1204 and 1439. When non-Christians hear the gosple message of forgiving past wrongs, what must they think when those who call themselves Christians cannot or don’t even try to do that with regard to fellow Christians? There are significant doctrinal issues, but we need to let go of historical grievances.

Well said!

The sinful actions of individual Christians, whether Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant, doesn’t have anything to do with the truth of our message - that Jesus Christ is the Truth and that we must follow Him as best we can.

 

[Ruprecht]

East and West have missed reuniting several times, mostly due to pride, bullheadednesss, misunderstandings, bad translations, etc, etc… With the world’s current moral downward spiral, the growth of false religions, the complete abandonment of any religion and raging atheism, Christians have a unique, a once in a millenium, opportunity to find what will unite us all. We are facing an onslaught against Christianity and while we argue among ourselves, the world is roaring right past us.
In many places, Christianity is already irrelevant but we still have to spread the Word. To stop the onslaught against our faith, we can take to heart Benjamin Franklin’s statement, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately”. In other words, we had better pull back together, or we will be but a remnant, like the Israelites returning from Babylon. Lord, guide us all back together.

 

[Schism_hater]

East and West have missed reuniting several times, mostly due to pride, bullheadednesss, misunderstandings, bad translations, etc, etc… With the world’s current moral downward spiral, the growth of false religions, the complete abandonment of any religion and raging atheism, Christians have a unique, a once in a millenium, opportunity to find what will unite us all. We are facing an onslaught against Christianity and while we argue among ourselves, the world is roaring right past us.
In many places, Christianity is already irrelevant but we still have to spread the Word. To stop the onslaught against our faith, we can take to heart Benjamin Franklin’s statement, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately”. In other words, we had better pull back together, or we will be but a remnant, like the Israelites returning from Babylon. Lord, guide us all back together.

Amen

 

[Peter_J]

This isn’t really an answer to the question in the OP; but it is remarkable that the pope and other high-ranking Catholic officials never tell Eastern Catholics “If you don’t like it why don’t you just leave?” and yet many *other *Catholics have absolutely no problem saying that. I wonder why that is?

 

[Peter_J]

I just want to add to this thread that it is time to try to let go of all past wrongs, on both sides. As an Orthodox, I will say it is time for my brothers to try to let go of 1204 and 1439. When non-Christians hear the gosple message of forgiving past wrongs, what must they think when those who call themselves Christians cannot or don’t even try to do that with regard to fellow Christians? There are significant doctrinal issues, but we need to let go of historical grievances.

I thought you were Catholic for some reason (which I can’t remember now). But anyhow …

 

[Peter_J]

This is generally how it goes: Somebody, somewhere would rather be a Patriarch in a newly-created Rome-affiliated Church than be whatever it is they were already in their non-Catholic church, and ta-da! An Eastern/Oriental Catholic Church is born.

The problem with that statement is that it should be in the past tense.

“Pastoral activity in the Catholic Church, Latin as well as Eastern, no longer aims at having the faithful of one Church pass over to the other; that is to say, it no longer aims at proselytizing among the Orthodox.”

• The Balamand Statement

 

[mardukm]

Even for those far outside of the Bolshevik or Russian expansionist empire, Rome has always been good about presenting them with an alternative to whatever power struggle they might be dealing with, provided via union with Rome. Look up the history of the beginnings of the Chaldean Catholic Church. In 1552, one Youhannan Salaqa was involved in a succession dispute within the CoE (different patriarchs for different regions, etc.), and effectively “solved” it by going to Rome to be ordained, thereby effectively starting the Chaldean Catholic Church via that union. This is generally how it goes: Somebody, somewhere would rather be a Patriarch in a newly-created Rome-affiliated Church than be whatever it is they were already in their non-Catholic church, and ta-da! An Eastern/Oriental Catholic Church is born.

Sorry if that sounds cynical, but that’s the history as it stands in most cases.

That union ended very soon afterwards. The lasting union (the one we in existence today) did not start by virtue of ecclesiastical politics.

I strongly question the adverb “generally” attached to that particular interpretation of Catholic Church history.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

The problem with that statement is that it should be in the past tense.

“Pastoral activity in the Catholic Church, Latin as well as Eastern, no longer aims at having the faithful of one Church pass over to the other; that is to say, it no longer aims at proselytizing among the Orthodox.”

• The Balamand Statement

I don’t believe brother Dzheremi was referring to proselytism.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Peter_J]

This is generally how it goes: Somebody, somewhere would rather be a Patriarch in a newly-created Rome-affiliated Church than be whatever it is they were already in their non-Catholic church, and ta-da! An Eastern/Oriental Catholic Church is born.

I strongly question the adverb “generally” attached to that particular interpretation of Catholic Church history.

Agreed. For example, in the Union of Brest – notwithstanding a certain degree of similarity with what dzheremi described – nobody was made a Patriarch.

 

[Peter_J]

The problem with that statement is that it should be in the past tense.

“Pastoral activity in the Catholic Church, Latin as well as Eastern, no longer aims at having the faithful of one Church pass over to the other; that is to say, it no longer aims at proselytizing among the Orthodox.”

• The Balamand Statement

I don’t believe brother Dzheremi was referring to proselytism.

Dzheremi, if I said anything wrong, then I humbly apologize.

 

[fordhamstudent]

Most likely converts to the Eastern Catholic Churches have more beef with latinization than born EC’s. Converts or those who transfer ritual Churches tend to be more passionate about issues than those raised in a particular Church. From my experience what people do not like Eastern or Latin is change–in fact people in general abhor change unless they are feminist theologians Most EC’s are not leaving the Eastern Catholic Churches for Orthodoxy in order to experience the fullness of the Orthodox tradition: in fact I would assert that Eastern Catholics in your local parish most likely are too worried about the economy than whether Father X is latinized or too Orthodox in praxis or if the local church has holy water stoops, stations, and confessionals in the church. We don’t live in the days of Fr. Alexis toth when there was no support for the Eastern Catholics in America by the Latin hierarchy and thus Orthodox polemics against Eastern Catholicism tend to be either less or non-effective in converting Eastern Catholics who were born in the Faith–now in the case of converts to the Eastern Catholic Churches Orthodox polemic is more effective since the convert phenomenon usually means jumping multiple Apostolic Churches in one’s lifetime

 

[jeannetherese]

East and West have missed reuniting several times, Lord, guide us all back together.

Amen.