How "catholic" are the Orthodox churches?

[Claire_from_DE]

When I think of the Orthodox churches, they seem local to me. The Catholic church has much missionary activity. We consider that the faith is meant to be universal, for all people. In other words, ‘catholic’. How do the Orthodox churches implement the command to go and teach all nations?

 

[Volodymyr]

Orthodox Church receives missionary direction from very beginning on Pentecote. Mission has its source in providence and Holy Trinity. Orthodox church has missionary activity external especially to be remembered St. Stefan Permskij brining Holy Faith to peoples beyond Urals, to St. Innokentij Moskovskij and St. German Aljaskij who brought faith to Pacific ocean and to Aljaska, Koree and China. Church mission now in Ukraina and Russia is to re-chrisianize our own societies and to create church servers to carry Holy Orthodox faith to rest of world.

 

[Hesychios]

When I think of the Orthodox churches, they seem local to me. The Catholic church has much missionary activity. We consider that the faith is meant to be universal, for all people. In other words, ‘catholic’. How do the Orthodox churches implement the command to go and teach all nations?

We are local everywhere we are: Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas.

http://www.cnewa.org/source-images/mag-images/magimages-32-2/32-2-3.jpg

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Interestingly the roots of the 20,000 member Ugandan Orthodox Church and some of the other African bodies is in western vagantes and self-styled Orthodox. It was not missionaries who founded those churches, but uncanonical groups stemming from Joseph Renee Villatte. After decades of canonical isolation, when they came into contact with canonical Orthodox, they sought reception.

Similar is the story with the “Mexican Orthodox Church” - a group of breakaway/vagante Catholics who sought reception into Orthodoxy. Outside of the “diaspora” the spread of Orthodoxy has largely been confined. Russia, to her credit, sent forth missionaries supported by the Imperial government to take Orthodoxy to the rest of the folks in the Russian dominion. I have not seen evidence of a highly motivated and assertive missiology to rest the world otherwise.

 

[Hesychios]

Interestingly the roots of the 20,000 member Ugandan Orthodox Church and some of the other African bodies is in western vagantes and self-styled Orthodox. It was not missionaries who founded those churches, but uncanonical groups stemming from Joseph Renee Villatte. After decades of canonical isolation, when they came into contact with canonical Orthodox, they sought reception.

Yes! Praised Be the LORD Jesus Christ!

It is a fundamental responsibility of the church to heal schism whenever possible, and bring people the True Sacraments as a help in their progress toward salvation. This will be done by both of our churches when possible, don’t you agree?

They are most welcome. Nevertheless, these incidents account for a minor percentage of the overall growth of Orthodox Christianity.

Similar is the story with the “Mexican Orthodox Church” - a group of breakaway/vagante Catholics who sought reception into Orthodoxy. Outside of the “diaspora” the spread of Orthodoxy has largely been confined. Russia, to her credit, sent forth missionaries supported by the Imperial government to take Orthodoxy to the rest of the folks in the Russian dominion.

It is true that the Orthodox did not have as many empires to support the spread of the Faith, and keep out competitor Christians.

Apparently, The Spanish, Portuguese and French empires did a world of help for the Roman Catholic church.

Even the British empire, once emancipation of RC was achieved in the 19th century, turned out to be a great platform for those Irish missioners, Subjects of the Crown.

Lucky you.

I have not seen evidence of a highly motivated and assertive missiology to rest the world otherwise.

If you don’t want to see it, you will not see it.

Don’t bother to look for Eastern Catholic missions across the globe either, they were as vigorously discouraged in Roman Catholic empires as non-Catholic missions. The only traces are from recent migration.

Nonetheless, the Orthodox church has been spreading and growing in all these years. And we are still all local manifestations of the One True Church.
*
Michael*

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Yes! Praised Be the LORD Jesus Christ!

It is a fundamental responsibility of the church to heal schism whenever possible, and bring people the True Sacraments as a help in their progress toward salvation. This will be done by both of our churches when possible, don’t you agree?

They are most welcome. Nevertheless, these incidents account for a minor percentage of the overall growth of Orthodox Christianity.

It is true that the Orthodox did not have as many empires to support the spread of the Faith, and keep out competitor Christians.

Apparently, The Spanish, Portuguese and French empires did a world of help for the Roman Catholic church.

Even the British empire, once emancipation of RC was achieved in the 19th century, turned out to be a great platform for those Irish missioners, Subjects of the Crown.

Lucky you.

If you don’t want to see it, you will not see it.

Don’t bother to look for Eastern Catholic missions across the globe either, they were as vigorously discouraged in Roman Catholic empires as non-Catholic missions. The only traces are from recent migration.

Nonetheless, the Orthodox church has been spreading and growing in all these years. And we are still all local manifestations of the One True Church.
*
Michael*

The empires have fallen Michael. Al-jazera laments the baptism of as many as 6M Muslims a year in sub-saharan Africa and parts of the Mid East by Evangelicals… Who can’t rightly be said to be taking advantage of the beneficence of the King of Spain.

If you don’t want to see it, you will not see it.

Conversely when you dislike someone, the way they hold their fork is unbearably annoying to you. When you like them, the way the lick their plate off at the dinner table is charming. If you want to see only visions of Ben Lomond that is all you will see.

But the idea of worldwide sustained growth in Orthodoxy is simply NOT supported by the numbers.

That Greek Catholics did not run missions to the non-Christian world is an odd-red herring to bring up. To compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges, one must look at the growth of the communion in general. But the assertion that “The only traces are from recent migration.” is an odd thing to hear from an Orthodox. One would be looking just as hard to find the Greek Orthodox Church where there are no Greeks!

And I have no problem with the Alexandrian reception of the auto-genic African Orthodox communities founded through the work of an ex-Anglican (“Patriarch Alexander Magquire”)… Certainly this is a good thing - who could say otherwise here? But we must be careful to not paint it as the great flowring of missiological efforts.

Apparently, The Spanish, Portuguese and French empires did a world of help for the Roman Catholic church.

If I were feeling especially bold I would suggest that some measure of Providence might be at play!

I wish the Orthodox mission efforts all the success in the world and would be just as pleased to see them baptize nation after nation. Some realism as to the efforts to date to do just that might be warranted though.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Perhaps an associated question would be in order. Do the Orthodox churches have religious orders that are not monastic?

In the Roman Catholic church there are many religious orders. For example, the Franciscan, Jesuit, and Dominican priests were instrumental in bringing Catholicism to America and in spreading it to the English parts of America where it was not welcomed. Also, there are many religious orders of women. There are even orders today which are specifically missionary.

 

[Alexius]

I really don’t understand the triumphalism here. Most of the Roman Catholic missionary work was spread during the late Middle Ages when individual nations sought to expand their power. The Orthodox nations were neither able nor interested in (except Russia) expanded there power. For many, the Muslim governments ruled with the “no conversions or missionaries” policy, so missions was an impossibility aside from secret baptisms. In Eastern Europe, issues between Orthodox and Catholic monarchs caused chaos and under Communism, Orthodoxy was suppressed. How was there any possibility for missions work? Even before the Schism, there were difficulties sending out missionaries. Cyril and Methodius were exceptions, but even they were mistreated by Latin missionaries. Constantinople was constantly under attack and the Middle Eastern Christians were already under Islamic rulers.

Instead of boasting numbers, we should pray that GOD preserves the numbers. The re-converting of Russia and Ukraine is necessary in the rest of the world as well, especially throughout the rest of Europe…Otherwise, you can prepare for a quick victory for Islam.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Orthodox Church receives missionary direction from very beginning on Pentecote. Mission has its source in providence and Holy Trinity. Orthodox church has missionary activity external especially to be remembered St. Stefan Permskij brining Holy Faith to peoples beyond Urals, to St. Innokentij Moskovskij and St. German Aljaskij who brought faith to Pacific ocean and to Aljaska, Koree and China. Church mission now in Ukraina and Russia is to re-chrisianize our own societies and to create church servers to carry Holy Orthodox faith to rest of world.

Yes, this is a very important mission in Russia and the Ukraine. When you talk about creating church servers to carry the faith to the rest of the world, would you explain a little more about this. Thank you.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Orthodox Church receives missionary direction from very beginning on Pentecote. Mission has its source in providence and Holy Trinity. Orthodox church has missionary activity external especially to be remembered St. Stefan Permskij brining Holy Faith to peoples beyond Urals, to St. Innokentij Moskovskij and St. German Aljaskij who brought faith to Pacific ocean and to Aljaska, Koree and China. Church mission now in Ukraina and Russia is to re-chrisianize our own societies and to create church servers to carry Holy Orthodox faith to rest of world.

Yes, this is a very important mission in Russia and the Ukraine. When you talk about creating church servers to carry the faith to the rest of the world, would you explain a little more about this. Thank you.

 

[VARC]

Political Power figures into the historic spread of Catholicism and Orthodoxy. The Orthodox (exept Russia) have historically lacked political power to spread Christianity beyond their borders because of the Muslims to their east and the germanic barbarians (Franks, Lombards, Bavarians, etc) to the west.

The height of Catholic political power was the colonial period. Spain, Portugal, and France used their power to spread catholicism to the New World. And today, the majority of the worlds catholics live in those colonized areas (Mexico, Central and South America). Catholicism has had a missionary advantage because of the politcal power of its nations not because it is more ‘catholic’ than the Orthodox Church.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Political Power figures into the historic spread of Catholicism and Orthodoxy. The Orthodox (exept Russia) have historically lacked political power to spread Christianity beyond their borders because of the Muslims to their east and the germanic barbarians (Franks, Lombards, Bavarians, etc) to the west.

The height of Catholic political power was the colonial period. Spain, Portugal, and France used their power to spread catholicism to the New World. And today, the majority of the worlds catholics live in those colonized areas (Mexico, Central and South America). Catholicism has had a missionary advantage because of the politcal power of its nations not because it is more ‘catholic’ than the Orthodox Church.

What about present day spreading of the gospel?

 

[VARC]

What about present day spreading of the gospel?

There are 3 mission parishes within driving distances to me. A GOA parish, an OCA mission, and an Antiochian mission that uses the Western form of the Liturgy called the Liturgy of St Gregory. Almost all of the people who attend the the latter two are Episcopal or Catholic converts. Half of the parishoners of the Greek parish are also converts.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

The height of Catholic political power was the colonial period. Spain, Portugal, and France used their power to spread catholicism to the New World. And today, the majority of the worlds catholics live in those colonized areas (Mexico, Central and South America). Catholicism has had a missionary advantage because of the politcal power of its nations not because it is more ‘catholic’ than the Orthodox Church.

The growth of the Catholic Church during the pontificate of JP2 was from 750M to 1.1B baptized. Would that it were the case everyone of them took it seriously like they should…

But the idea that “the missions were then because you had the power”… Well this doesn’t play out all the way.

Greece has been independent since the early 1800s, Colonialism has largely fallen since the 1960s. Where there is resolve and intent, there is a way. The GOA parish in this city is a sight to behold on property taking up a downtown block with moasics made from Italian glass installed by Italian artisans they flew over to get the job done. A church of such congregations, if it has the wherewithall to build such, can send out missions. With the eception of a very few converts who are not of the “so-I-married-a-Greek” / “My-big-fat-Greek-wedding” variety, 100 years on the “Greekness” of this community that “has theirs” is still a site to behold.

Alexius, why is revealing in the glory of having achieved some modicum of success in spreading the gospel to the four corners “triumphalism”? If and when these threads turn to the superiority of Byzantine liturgical praxis (wrongly presented as being wholly more ancient than than some of it is)… especially over modern Roman liturgical praxis (especially aberations!) no such similar distaste or cries for fairness and avoiding triumphalism exists??? Why is that?

Even before the Schism, there were difficulties sending out missionaries. Cyril and Methodius were exceptions, but even they were mistreated by Latin missionaries.

Check the overall historicity of this statement, Alexius. Who in fact sent C&M?

 

[VARC]

The growth of the Catholic Church during the pontificate of JP2 was from 750M to 1.1B baptized. Would that it were the case everyone of them took it seriously like they should…

The numbers are misleading. The 1.1 billion counts everyone ever baptized in the catholic church regardless of whether or not they are still practicing catholics or even if they are still catholic at all. The pontificate of JPII saw the most conversions from catholicism than any other pontificate but those folks are still counted as catholic in the 1.1 billion.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

The numbers are misleading. The 1.1 billion counts everyone ever baptized in the catholic church regardless of whether or not they are still practicing catholics or even if they are still catholic at all. The pontificate of JPII saw the most conversions from catholicism than any other pontificate but those folks are still counted as catholic in the 1.1 billion.

And where did they convert to?

That is the problem with statistics. Likes, damned lies, statistics and then ecclesial statistics.

But taken at face value, using the numbers as presented can accomplish the same thing as pairing and pruning the numbers for greater accuracy in using methodologies or definitions you agree with for how to count adherents.

But if we do that pruning and re-counting, I think you will find the proportions remain roughly similar. US State department analyts have concluded that the Russian Orthodox Church (Which often adds 100M to the “300M Orthodox worldwide”) can’t honestly be said to have more than 12-20M self-identifying members. If we want to winnow it down further, how many are active communicants will be trickier still.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

There are 3 mission parishes within driving distances to me. A GOA parish, an OCA mission, and an Antiochian mission that uses the Western form of the Liturgy called the Liturgy of St Gregory. Almost all of the people who attend the the latter two are Episcopal or Catholic converts. Half of the parishoners of the Greek parish are also converts.

What is a ‘mission parish’? Is it the result of missionary activity? Did the priests who established it come from another part of the US or from another country?

Here in Delaware a ‘mission parish’ starts when enough Catholics live in an area so a priest comes from the closest church to say mass there. Eventually, a regular parish is established there. So, for us a mission parish doesn’t necessarily mean there has been missionary activity.

 

[VARC]

And where did they convert to?

That is the problem with statistics. Likes, damned lies, statistics and then ecclesial statistics.

But taken at face value, using the numbers as presented can accomplish the same thing as pairing and pruning the numbers for greater accuracy in using methodologies or definitions you agree with for how to count adherents.

But if we do that pruning and re-counting, I think you will find the proportions remain roughly similar. US State department analyts have concluded that the Russian Orthodox Church (Which often adds 100M to the “300M Orthodox worldwide”) can’t honestly be said to have more than 12-20M self-identifying members. If we want to winnow it down further, how many are active communicants will be trickier still.

I agree. That is why I don’t put much stock in any of the numbers. I just pointed out that the 1.1 billion is misleading. I stand by my original statement that political power greatly effects the missionary activity of the Church

 

[VARC]

What is a ‘mission parish’? Is it the result of missionary activity? Did the priests who established it come from another part of the US or from another country?

Here in Delaware a ‘mission parish’ starts when enough Catholics live in an area so a priest comes from the closest church to say mass there. Eventually, a regular parish is established there. So, for us a mission parish doesn’t necessarily mean there has been missionary activity.

In the case of the OCA, a mother parish established a mission parish some 40 miles away. That mission rents a chapel and now has a preist assigned to it by the bishop.

The Greek parish is actually an established parish but they are in between preists right now.

The Antiochian mission is a little different. About 40 disaffected episcopalians approached the Antiochian archdiocese and asked to be received into the Orthodox Church. One of them was ordained an Orthodox preist and they use a Western Rite of Liturgy (an English Tridentine Mass with some small changes).

 

[Alexius]

Alexius, why is revealing in the glory of having achieved some modicum of success in spreading the gospel to the four corners “triumphalism”? If and when these threads turn to the superiority of Byzantine liturgical praxis (wrongly presented as being wholly more ancient than than some of it is)… especially over modern Roman liturgical praxis (especially aberations!) no such similar distaste or cries for fairness and avoiding triumphalism exists??? Why is that?

Check the overall historicity of this statement, Alexius. Who in fact sent C&M?

When I speak of triumphalism, I mean that there is this sort of glory in numbers. You can be happy about the progress without criticizing the activity of another. One look at Orthodox history will reveal a great deal of issues preventing its spread. Since many of the barriers have fallen in the past half century, the Orthodox bishops have began to re-evangelize their people and even expand to new converts. Orthodoxy has gone from “unknown” to “known but misunderstood” in only recent history. It has found many eager converts in the Americas, in Britain and in Australia and she is reaching out within her own territories as well.

I won’t respond to the statement about Byzantine praxis being superior (seems like a poke at the Orthodox) because it goes two ways and is not what this is about.

That Sts. Cyril and Methodius went to Central Europe and were mistreated by the Latins is quite clear. That is why they then sought out the Pope’s consent and blessing. He certainly approved, but that did not do much to end the mistreatment.