Fate of Eastern Catholic Churches if Orthodox are Reconciled

  • Thread starter Thread starter JaMc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JaMc

Guest
One thing I was wondering, with the speculation regarding re-unification of the Orthodox Churches with Rome, what would be the fate of the Eastern Catholic Churches with Orthodox origins, i.e., Ukrainian Catholic, Coptic Catholic, etc.? Would they remain separate, or would they merge back into their Orthodox counterparts?
 
JaMc said:
One thing I was wondering, with the speculation regarding re-unification of the Orthodox Churches with Rome, what would be the fate of the Eastern Catholic Churches with Orthodox origins, i.e., Ukrainian Catholic, Coptic Catholic, etc.? Would they remain separate, or would they merge back into their Orthodox counterparts?
Click to expand...
I would love to be under the omophorion of HH Pope Shenoute III AND HH Pope Benedict XVI.

Locally, I suspect that one bishop would become the proper bishop, and the other would become a co-adjutor bishop, with the right of succession, or an auxiliary bishop.

Since the office of Patriarch and Metropolitan were canonically created, perhaps an office of co-adjutor Patriarch or Metropolitan can also be created.

Blessings
 
I like mardukm’s answer 🙂

The whole idea of reunification gets me sooo excited!!! Imagine what we could do together that we haven’t been able to do for a thousand years!!

My dream is that the official unification will take place in 2054, exactly 1000 years after the schism started. 🙂 How wonderful would that be?
 
One thing I was wondering, with the speculation regarding re-unification of the Orthodox Churches with Rome,

Actually, the Orthodox Churches were never “united with Rome” to start with, so there can be no “reunification.” This was expressed in an article by Fr. Robert Taft, SJ.: “EASTERN PRESUPPOSITION” AND WESTERN LITURGICAL RENEWAL.

However, I understand that the Melkite bishops, from the Patriarch on down, have said that they will happy resign their sees if this will facilitate reconciliation with the Antiochian Orthodox.
 
Cluny said:
Actually, the Orthodox Churches were never “united with Rome” to start with, so there can be no “reunification.” This was expressed in an article by Fr. Robert Taft, SJ.: “EASTERN PRESUPPOSITION” AND WESTERN LITURGICAL RENEWAL.
I think this either presupposes the “Orthodox Church” as a distinct and temporal organizational entity, or it presupposes that the Orthodox Church did not exist in the beginning along with the Catholic Church before the Schism. I hope it is the former.

Blessings
Click to expand...
 
I always though that the point of “de-Latinization” and restoring the Eastern liturgical praxis is so that when the day of reunion comes, it will be easier to integrate with their Orthodox counterparts.

I’m a cautious optimist. We will have unification by 2019, and there will be a singular creed and the Byzantine Catholics will be re-integrated with Orthodoxy. If we’re lucky, maybe Ukraine will be autocephalous as well.
 
A lot depends upon the desires of both synods…

Some would, no doubt, come in as separate Churches Sui Iuris.

Others, like the Antiochian Orthodox and the Melkites, would likely merge and make coadjutors…
 
John_Larocque said:
I always though that the point of “de-Latinization” and restoring the Eastern liturgical praxis is so that when the day of reunion comes, it will be easier to integrate with their Orthodox counterparts.
Click to expand...
Somewhat related to this (though probably warranting a new thread), does the Catholic Church see the Orthodox as believing any heresies? Clearly the Orthodox see doctrines such as the immaculate conception, purgatory, indulgences, etc. as heresies, so I’m wondering if Catholics see any heresies in Orthodox doctrines. I would venture to say no, if the Eastern Catholics are supposed to be “Orthodox in communion with Rome”.
 
<<I think this either presupposes the “Orthodox Church” as a distinct and temporal organizational entity, or it presupposes that the Orthodox Church did not exist in the beginning along with the Catholic Church before the Schism. I hope it is the former.>>

The former. Don’t worry.

As regards Josaphat Kuntsevitch, I guess he will be dealt with the same way as his Orthodox counterpart, Athanasius of Brest.

Maybe a combined commemoration?
 
Cluny said:
One thing I was wondering, with the speculation regarding re-unification of the Orthodox Churches with Rome,

Actually, the Orthodox Churches were never “united with Rome” to start with, so there can be no “reunification.” This was expressed in an article by Fr. Robert Taft, SJ.: “EASTERN PRESUPPOSITION” AND WESTERN LITURGICAL RENEWAL.

However, I understand that the Melkite bishops, from the Patriarch on down, have said that they will happy resign their sees if this will facilitate reconciliation with the Antiochian Orthodox.
Click to expand...
Before the Schism there were five Patriarchiate Churches, Rome, Alexandria, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Constantinople. All five of them were united and they were called "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. To say that there Orthodox Church was never united with Rome, that there was never a Roman See in the beginning. Are you sure about this? Perhaps, your priest is needs to study the Church prior to the Schism of 1054 AD.

I assure that prior to the Schism all the Churches were united under the name Catholic Church. See for yourself:

“Concerning those who call themselves Cathari, if they come over to the Catholic and Apostolic Church, the great and holy Synod decrees that they who are ordained shall continue as they are in the clergy. But it is before all things necessary that they should profess in writing that they will observe and follow the dogmas of the Catholic and Apostolic Church; in particular that they will communicate with persons who have been twice married, and with those who having lapsed in persecution have had a period [of penance] laid upon them, and a time [of restoration] fixed so that in all things they will follow the dogmas of the Catholic Church…” Council of Nicaea I (A.D. 325).
 
JaMc said:
One thing I was wondering, with the speculation regarding re-unification of the Orthodox Churches with Rome, what would be the fate of the Eastern Catholic Churches with Orthodox origins, i.e., Ukrainian Catholic, Coptic Catholic, etc.? Would they remain separate, or would they merge back into their Orthodox counterparts?
Click to expand...
Father Maximos of Holy Resurrection Romanian Catholic Monastery speaks in the first minute of Part 2 “Who are Eastern Catholics?” from the perspective of a Byzantine Eastern Catholic, “…one day, and we hope and we pray and we work for this day, when the Catholic and Orthodox churches become one again, when that day comes then the Eastern Catholic Churches disappear, and we hope that they disappear, we hope to disappear… in the great positive sense in which we become reunited with our mother churches…”
 
5Loaves said:
Father Maximos of Holy Resurrection Romanian Catholic Monastery speaks in the first minute of Part 2 “Who are Eastern Catholics?” from the perspective of a Byzantine Eastern Catholic, “…one day, and we hope and we pray and we work for this day, when the Catholic and Orthodox churches become one again, when that day comes then the Eastern Catholic Churches disappear, and we hope that they disappear, we hope to disappear… in the great positive sense in which we become reunited with our mother churches…”
Click to expand...
This has always been my position as well.

Although when someone like myself becomes Orthodox, the comment coming from me does not seem to be appreciated as well as when someone makes the same statement and is also Catholic.

Nevertheless, the destiny of the Eastern Catholic churches is, ideally, to disappear. The sooner the better, because that will be a solid indication of progress in Christian harmony and reconciliation.
 
Seamus_L said:
And what will Ukrainian Catholics do with St Josaphat ?
Click to expand...
Venerate him as always. He is a canonized saint. Canonization is infallible. Blessed Leonid Feodorov didn’t have a problem with him did he? Of course not because he realized that the Catholic Church is the True Church. Once you realize that everything else follows.
 
The only way that the Orthodox will re-unite, is if Pope Benedict XVI agrees to his office as a first among equals, and eliminates the filioque from the Nicene Creed recited in Roman parishes. They have removed it in Byzantine parishes. I am not to optimistic about re-union. If it does come. It will not involve the entire Eastern Orthodox. There are even splinters in the Eastern Orthodox world. There may be some form of “prayerful” unity. But I still think we are to far away from communal unity. Hopefully I’m wrong!.
 
Really, I suspect that cross-communion will exist well before formal unity. I doubt formal uity on any grand scale will ever eliminate the Eastern Orthodox… mostly because any such unification of hierarchy will almost invariably cause schism… as it always has.
 
Hesychios said:
This has always been my position as well.

Although when someone like myself becomes Orthodox, the comment coming from me does not seem to be appreciated as well as when someone makes the same statement and is also Catholic.

Nevertheless, the destiny of the Eastern Catholic churches is, ideally, to disappear. The sooner the better, because that will be a solid indication of progress in Christian harmony and reconciliation.
Click to expand...
That is true for most but not all. Some ECs don’t come from an Eastern or Oriental Orthodox majority body. i.e. - The Maronites. And with some like the Chaldeans they are much larger then the Communion they originated from. Even if all the former “Orthodox” Catholics rejoined their former Churches, there would still be a few million “Eastern Catholics” left between the Maronites, Chaldeans, Syro–Malabarese, and Italo-albanians.
 
This seems easy enough. Now, I’d like to present an oddly-shaped cog in the wheel:

What to do with the parallel EO jurisdictions set up alongside OO jurisdictions.

For example, in the see Alexandria. Should there be two separate jurisdictions, or just one jurisdiction, with one Patriarch providing the needs of both Traditions through patriarchal vicars?

Blessings.
 
mardukm said:
This seems easy enough. Now, I’d like to present an oddly-shaped cog in the wheel:

What to do with the parallel EO jurisdictions set up alongside OO jurisdictions.

For example, in the see Alexandria. Should there be two separate jurisdictions, or just one jurisdiction, with one Patriarch providing the needs of both Traditions through patriarchal vicars?

Blessings.
Click to expand...
Dear mardukm
I thin kthere is some association between Syriac orthodox church of Antioch and Coptic see of Alexandria. What do you tell of this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top