How do the Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic faiths differ?

[mgy100]

This is all very interesting, but the question was about faith, and you are talking about praxis. Or do you consider your response to be about faith? I admit that I sometimes get the idea that Romophobia is central to the faith of internet’s novo-orthodox.

Fortunately, I also have considerable experience with real parish life with a mix of cradles and converts and immigrants in an Orthodox mission. From that experience it’s easy to be reassured by all of the good people who are working out their salvation with fear and trembling, rather than pontificating from their lofty perch on the first rungs of the ladder of ascent.

And to what, indeed, would you compare our praxis, anyway? To ACROD, who, after all of the history of this century, is actually not so very far ahead of us in liturgical restoration and de-latinization. (P.S. It’s clear your not reporting from the most recent Odpusts.)

Pardon me. It is for the Catholic communion and magisterium to assess the gravity of the these issues and the need for definition and declaration. I don’t doubt that you might find it all very interesting, but I cannot fathom your chutzpah in assessing seriousness and in calling for answers. The noive!

When International Orthodoxy will agree to sit down at a meeting that includes the dreaded U … know-what’s, (as does occur in at meetings in north America), then the attendance check will be meaningful.

I am talking about these being a measuring stick for the beliefs held internally. And I am talking from recent Otpusts.
You can not compare the ACROD to the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church. While they have a shared background, the two have gone in opposite directions, obviously, that is like a 70 year old story there.

Veils, nothing wrong with wearing them. However, when you are a Greek Catholic/Byzcath, and you have people that come to the church and demand compromises in your tradition because they don’t respect the Catholic east, and only come because the priest faces east and uses incense, it is hard.
There may be romophobia by some protestant converts on the internet, but in real life, no one sits around and worries about Roma, since most of us have Roman Catholic or Greek Catholic family members.
Read, “The Truth, what every Roman Catholic should know about Orthodoxy” by Clark Carlton. that’ll show you the answers you seek. So will the books by (Bishop Kallistos) Timothy Ware, that are available in Barnes and Nobles.
They demonstrate better than I can here the differences.

 

[dvdjs]

I am talking about these being a measuring stick for the beliefs held internally.

I think that you would have to some challenging work in calibrating that stick if you want to make a substantive comment.

And I am talking from recent Otpusts.

Well you make like to be informed that the benediction is a thing of the past. Too bad, in my opinion; it was a beautiful service; very byzantine and very “nash”.

You can not compare the ACROD to the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Church. While they have a shared background, the two have gone in opposite directions, obviously, that is like a 70 year old story there.

I think that it is the only valid comparison. And the take home message is that ACROD, even though it had “gone in an opposite direction” has been very slow to “de-latinize”. What do their practices say of their faith and their Orthodoxy?

There may be romophobia by some protestant converts on the internet, but in real life, no one sits around and worries about Roma, since most of us have Roman Catholic or Greek Catholic family members.

I agree that the internet is a poor place to get a sense of the faith of some church or another. But Romophobia is not limited to Protestant converts. It also is very prevalent among those who fled the Catholic church.

Read, “The Truth, what every Roman Catholic should know about Orthodoxy” by Clark Carlton. that’ll show you the answers you seek…

My personal experience: From time-to-time I hear real-live Orthodox talk, in church, about contrasts with the Catholic faith. (That’s a real difference; I’ve never heard the reverse.) And I’ve always been left wondering, where on earth do they get their ideas about the Catholic faith. Clark Carlton? … Sure, he knows all about it.

 

[mgy100]

I think that you would have to some challenging work in calibrating that stick if you want to make a substantive comment.

Well you make like to be informed that the benediction is a thing of the past. Too bad, in my opinion; it was a beautiful service; very byzantine and very “nash”.

I think that it is the only valid comparison. And the take home message is that ACROD, even though it had “gone in an opposite direction” has been very slow to “de-latinize”. What do their practices say of their faith and their Orthodoxy?

I agree that the internet is a poor place to get a sense of the faith of some church or another. But Romophobia is not limited to Protestant converts. It also is very prevalent among those who fled the Catholic church.

My personal experience: From time-to-time I hear real-live Orthodox talk, in church, about contrasts with the Catholic faith. (That’s a real difference; I’ve never heard the reverse.) And I’ve always been left wondering, where on earth do they get their ideas about the Catholic faith. Clark Carlton? … Sure, he knows all about it.

Honestly, what is your experience with ACROD? The comment “slow to de-latinize” is a crass discredit to the tremondous amount of work that has been done since those Rusyn-Americans that chose to re-align themselves with the Ecumenical Patriarch. This comment also is ignorant of Metropolitan Nicholas’ work over the last 20 years, in which that time he has made tremondous strides in de-latinizing.
I recommened Fr. Larry Barriger’s books, Good Victory and Glory to Jesus Christ that talk about these issues. Father covers the topic in greater detail than I can here.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Honestly, what is your experience with ACROD? The comment “slow to de-latinize” is a crass discredit to the tremondous amount of work that has been done since those Rusyn-Americans that chose to re-align themselves with the Ecumenical Patriarch.

This comment also is ignorant of Metropolitan Nicholas’ work over the last 20 years, in which that time he has made tremondous strides in de-latinizing.

What I know of it - regularly attending and visiting ACROD parishes up until ten years ago - is that there is *nothing inaccurate *in saying ACROD parishes have been slow to de-latinize AT ALL. Baldechinos, BCC pew books, westernized iconography, Latin style tabernacles and a number of other instances persisted for decades and can still be found in some places.

This isn’t to denigrate or deny Mtr. +NICHOLAS’ efforts… This speaks only to the fact that Latinized influence remained in different forms for decades.

 

[Madaglan]

Originally Posted by ASimpleSinner:

What I know of it - regularly attending and visiting ACROD parishes up until ten years ago - is that there is *nothing inaccurate *in saying ACROD parishes have been slow to de-latinize AT ALL. Baldechinos, BCC pew books, westernized iconography, Latin style tabernacles and a number of other instances persisted for decades and can still be found in some places.

This isn’t to denigrate or deny Mtr. +NICHOLAS’ efforts… This speaks only to the fact that Latinized influence remained in different forms for decades.

I have not had the opportunity to visit various ACROD parishes. I wouldn’t be surprised though if many had Latinizations.

I’ve been to many Ruthenian churches, mostly throughout Ohio and Pennsylvania. Some are quite Latinized still, others not so much. The Ruthenian church I attended for two years has stations of the cross, stained glass windows of the saints, confessionals and a giant corpus on an Orthodox Cross. The filioque continued to be said even after the revised liturgy was implemented.

The ACROD church I go to is relatively new and multi-ethnic. It’s a mission parish. Most of the people at the parish are converts from a Protestant background, so the ethos of the parish is slightly different I imagine than many other ACROD parishes. Many of the Orthodox there are still developing an understanding of living a sacramental/mystical life.

One thing I would add, which I believe was brought up in another post: several of the traditions held by ACROD, the Ruthenians and the OCA that are claimed to be “Latinizations” are actually native traditions of the Carpatho-Russian mountain people. I haven’t studied which traditions these may be.

 

[mgy100]

What I know of it - regularly attending and visiting ACROD parishes up until ten years ago - is that there is *nothing inaccurate *in saying ACROD parishes have been slow to de-latinize AT ALL. Baldechinos, BCC pew books, westernized iconography, Latin style tabernacles and a number of other instances persisted for decades and can still be found in some places.

This isn’t to denigrate or deny Mtr. +NICHOLAS’ efforts… This speaks only to the fact that Latinized influence remained in different forms for decades.

Ten years is a good bit of time. As far as icons, etc… those take LOTS of money. When I think Latinization I think, Stations of the Cross instead of PreSanctified, Sat. evening Liturgy instead of Vespers…(which the ACROD doesn’t do).
But the externals, things that can take a lot of money to change, those have to be handled in due time. And from my experience visiting parishes, no matter what jurisdiction, if they’ve been redone, they get rid of those babies for cherubim, the DaVinci Lat Supper, etc…
But abolishing non-Eastern Liturgical services is far more de-latinization than going in and say, taking out pews. While all five senses are used, it is the prayer that guides them all.

On that note, while I agree many churches, Greek Catholic, Ruthenian Catholic, ACROD, OCA, etc… need some new icons or a re-working of the worship space. But, these cost money and lots of it.

And it’s good to know where we were running into each other, as I see latinizations more in the praxis and prayer rather than the icons, what kind of candles, etc… are in the church. And I agree, some of the older church furniture and icons need to be replaced as time and money permit. I generally don’t complain about those things because I don’t have the money to buy new iconography or re-carpet the church. It’d be nice though, to have the money!

 

[Alexius]

Ten years is a good bit of time. As far as icons, etc… those take LOTS of money. When I think Latinization I think, Stations of the Cross instead of PreSanctified, Sat. evening Liturgy instead of Vespers…(which the ACROD doesn’t do).
But the externals, things that can take a lot of money to change, those have to be handled in due time. And from my experience visiting parishes, no matter what jurisdiction, if they’ve been redone, they get rid of those babies for cherubim, the DaVinci Lat Supper, etc…
But abolishing non-Eastern Liturgical services is far more de-latinization than going in and say, taking out pews. While all five senses are used, it is the prayer that guides them all.

On that note, while I agree many churches, Greek Catholic, Ruthenian Catholic, ACROD, OCA, etc… need some new icons or a re-working of the worship space. But, these cost money and lots of it.

And it’s good to know where we were running into each other, as I see latinizations more in the praxis and prayer rather than the icons, what kind of candles, etc… are in the church. And I agree, some of the older church furniture and icons need to be replaced as time and money permit. I generally don’t complain about those things because I don’t have the money to buy new iconography or re-carpet the church. It’d be nice though, to have the money!

The least Latinized Eastern church I’ve been to was a ROCOR parish. I didn’t notice any Latin influences…With the exception of that lone parish, all other churches had varying degrees of Latinizations. I hesitate to use the term, though, for one reason. Most Orthodox parishes have pews in the US, but I wonder if this is technically a “Latinization…?”

 

[Woodstock]

The Greek Orthodox with their pews, kneelers, and organs are what I would call latinized. I know many Orthodox who would agree. None of them Greeks.

 

[dvdjs]

Honestly, what is your experience with ACROD? The comment “slow to de-latinize” is a crass discredit to the tremondous amount of work that has been done since those Rusyn-Americans that chose to re-align themselves with the Ecumenical Patriarch. This comment also is ignorant of Metropolitan Nicholas’ work over the last 20 years, in which that time he has made tremondous strides in de-latinizing.

No the comment is not crass, a discredit, or ignorant. You are taking about great strides over the last 20 years, or, in a later post, the last ten years. Apparently, in the first 50-60 years, there wasn’t an all-out effort for rapid “delatinizing”.

Is that important? Not to me. But then again I wasn’t the one who identified some latinized practices as though they were diagnostic of differences in “faith” between EC’s and EO’s.

In your haste to take offense, you missed my point. I am happy to take ACROD our reference point in Orthodoxy. I am far less interested in how the Great Russians do things, let alone, the Greeks. And I think it fair to say that despite our different paths of 70+ years, we still have salient characteristics of praxis, and certainly of faith, in common; and that becomes more true with time as we also undertake that tremendous work of restoration.

 

[FiremanFrank]

You are right. These things need to be addressed, but I doubt anyone on here is willing to do so…There needs to be a council to address the inconsistensies between Eastern and Western Catholics. If I were the Pope, then I would do this asap. Until then, the amount of Eastern Catholics will continue to decline…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

“Things” will be addressed as the Holy Spirit guides the Holy Father to address them, and not when you or I think they “should” be addresssed.

Until then, Eastern Catholicism will do just fine and she will continue to be one of two lungs that the Holy Church breathes with.

Can’t say the same for the orthodox, at least not until they formally reunite with the church of her origins …

 

[ASimpleSinner]

You are right. These things need to be addressed, but I doubt anyone on here is willing to do so…There needs to be a council to address the inconsistensies between Eastern and Western Catholics. If I were the Pope, then I would do this asap. Until then, the amount of Eastern Catholics will continue to decline…
Alexius

Steady on there!

Trends in Eastern Catholic decline have pretty handily matched trends in general Eastern Christian decline…

Where we have immigration, we have big churches, or new churches. Where we had big churches 30 years ago (when things were as latinized as could be) we now have medium parishes. Where they were medium, they are now small, where they were small, they are now closed.

The OCA has done a little better managing to keep its smaller parishes open, they get served by clergy working part time who have full time secular jobs.

The last OCA yearbook lists 1026 clergy - 180 some deacons, the rest priests…

Using the Hartford Institute’s estimated membership of 39,000 for the OCA…

(per: hirr.hartsem.edu/research/tab2.pdf)

You get -
ratio of clergy to laity: 38.01
ratio of priests to laity: 47.04
39,000 / 456 parishes = 85.52 members per parish

Using Fr. Jonathan Ivanoff’s estimated membership of 27,196

You get -
ratio of clergy to laity: 26.50
ratio of priests to laity: 32.85
27,196 / 456 parishes = 59.64 members per parish

If some sources are correct, that the OCA active membership is closer to 15,000 you are getting to a point where 1 in 15 members of the OCA is a deacon, priest or bishop. Not great any way you slice it.

Where growth is occuring or numbers are maintained, it has been through recent immigration - see the study linked above.

Also read THE HOPKO LETTER

Father Laments:

• the virtual reduction of church life among many clergy to liturgical services and ritual practices, with uncritical imitations of old world practices and subjective alterations of our received rites and texts

• the virtual reduction of supra-parochial church life to liturgical services, ecclesiastical celebrations and social events

• our church’s failure to attract American born Orthodox young people to our seminaries and monasteries (for if we did not have the converts, those born abroad, and the clergy children that we do in our seminaries and monasteries, we would have almost no seminarians and monastics at all!)

• our church’s failure to support and foster a vibrant monastic and missionary movement

• the misrepresentation in and outside the church of its statistical figures (such as that our church has 400,00 members when less than 30,000 identify themselves as members)

• dioceses that have fewer members than their cathedral churches alone had 50 years ago

• the point where a church of 200 people is considered to be large

• the loss of the influence and respect that our church and many of its leaders once hand among Orthodox and non-Orthodox in North American and abroad.

Just addressing the issues of Latinization alluded to in the post you were responding to will NOT overnight turn us into a hot bed of eastern growth.

A little secret? Tomorrow our bishops could call Marcus Grodi at The Coming Home Network that counsels Evangelical and mainline Protestant convert minsters becoming Catholic (over 1000 in America!) and say “Marcus, send 'em all to Pittsbrgh, let’s get C&M filled up, we’ll ordain em all!”…

And then…?

Well, ordaining 20 or 200 married men that we could not afford to support tomorrow and having them start missions while working secular jobs would not be growth. It would be everything Father Thomas was lamenting above.

Yes there have been converts, we all know the press that the 2000 Evangelical Orthodox got (the year you were born Alexius!) as well as the HOM folks.

But before thinking that it is all growth and roses, google: "Convert boomlet"

Then start reading.

 

[Alexius]

Steady on there!

Trends in Eastern Catholic decline have pretty handily matched trends in general Eastern Christian decline…

Where we have immigration, we have big churches, or new churches. Where we had big churches 30 years ago (when things were as latinized as could be) we now have medium parishes. Where they were medium, they are now small, where they were small, they are now closed.

The OCA has done a little better managing to keep its smaller parishes open, they get served by clergy working part time who have full time secular jobs.

The last OCA yearbook lists 1026 clergy - 180 some deacons, the rest priests…

Using the Hartford Institute’s estimated membership of 39,000 for the OCA…

(per: hirr.hartsem.edu/research/tab2.pdf)

You get -
ratio of clergy to laity: 38.01
ratio of priests to laity: 47.04
39,000 / 456 parishes = 85.52 members per parish

Using Fr. Jonathan Ivanoff’s estimated membership of 27,196

You get -
ratio of clergy to laity: 26.50
ratio of priests to laity: 32.85
27,196 / 456 parishes = 59.64 members per parish

If some sources are correct, that the OCA active membership is closer to 15,000 you are getting to a point where 1 in 15 members of the OCA is a deacon, priest or bishop. Not great any way you slice it.

Where growth is occuring or numbers are maintained, it has been through recent immigration - see the study linked above.

Also read THE HOPKO LETTER

Father Laments:

Just addressing the issues of Latinization alluded to in the post you were responding to will NOT overnight turn us into a hot bed of eastern growth.

A little secret? Tomorrow our bishops could call Marcus Grodi at The Coming Home Network that counsels Evangelical and mainline Protestant convert minsters becoming Catholic (over 1000 in America!) and say “Marcus, send 'em all to Pittsbrgh, let’s get C&M filled up, we’ll ordain em all!”…

And then…?

Well, ordaining 20 or 200 married men that we could not afford to support tomorrow and having them start missions while working secular jobs would not be growth. It would be everything Father Thomas was lamenting above.

Yes there have been converts, we all know the press that the 2000 Evangelical Orthodox got (the year you were born Alexius!) as well as the HOM folks.

But before thinking that it is all growth and roses, google: "Convert boomlet"

Then start reading.

I understand the overall decline. I recall reading of the 5-year lifespan of the American Orthodox convert It is also most apparent how many Eastern Christians actually practice their faith by showing up on Christmas and Easter. The parishes are filled on those days, but every other day is the same few people. I remember hearing a priest lament about how few worship GOD at his parish on Sundays. Most are either immigrants or converts. I am not saying that the problem is exclusively Catholic, but it is apparent from the numbers of individuals switching to Orthodoxy from Eastern rites that something is wrong. To me, it seems to be the Latinizations and a yearning to return to a more pure Eastern Christianity (i.e. ACROD because of the celibacy). I am also sure that many former Eastern Catholics have switched to Latin rite parishes because of convenience. Most Eastern Catholic churches are either on the East or West Coast, or Chicago, so if one moves to [say] Kansas, they may have difficulty finding an Eastern church (either Orthodox or Catholic). In that case, they will probably attend the Latin rite church and there children will be baptized in the Latin rite.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[ASimpleSinner]

I understand the overall decline. I recall reading of the 5-year lifespan of the American Orthodox convert It is also most apparent how many Eastern Christians actually practice their faith by showing up on Christmas and Easter. The parishes are filled on those days, but every other day is the same few people. I remember hearing a priest lament about how few worship GOD at his parish on Sundays. Most are either immigrants or converts. I am not saying that the problem is exclusively Catholic, but it is apparent from the numbers of individuals switching to Orthodoxy from Eastern rites that something is wrong. To me, it seems to be the Latinizations and a yearning to return to a more pure Eastern Christianity (i.e. ACROD because of the celibacy). I am also sure that many former Eastern Catholics have switched to Latin rite parishes because of convenience. Most Eastern Catholic churches are either on the East or West Coast, or Chicago, so if one moves to [say] Kansas, they may have difficulty finding an Eastern church (either Orthodox or Catholic). In that case, they will probably attend the Latin rite church and there children will be baptized in the Latin rite.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

Alexius,

All good and valid points. My one caveat is that we have to be careful how we consider the intra-Eastern conversions (ie. Greek Catholics who go Orthodox or - occasionally - vice versa). I would not be too quick to ascribe intent… The reasons are many and varied.

 

[Alexius]

Alexius,

All good and valid points. My one caveat is that we have to be careful how we consider the intra-Eastern conversions (ie. Greek Catholics who go Orthodox or - occasionally - vice versa). I would not be too quick to ascribe intent… The reasons are many and varied.

Point taken

 

[Isa_Almisry]

“Things” will be addressed as the Holy Spirit guides the Holy Father to address them, and not when you or I think they “should” be addresssed.

Until then, Eastern Catholicism will do just fine and she will continue to be one of two lungs that the Holy Church breathes with.

Can’t say the same for the orthodox, at least not until they formally reunite with the church of her origins …

We are the Church of our origins , and we still recite her unadulterated Creed.

Since you pope has raised the discussion of the issues, it would seem he thinks it time.

 

[Seamus_L]

As for differences, I believe the Orthodox Churches retain a number of Old Testament laws related to the issue of blood and cleanliness.

 

[JBoscoII]

After reading through this dialouge I wanted to know more of the Eastern Churches. I went to the main CA site and did a quick search to find this article posted Janurary last year.

catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0601fea4.asp

It is a quick read and offers a humourous intro. It got me thinking if there is any Catholic internet sites that arent “Latinized”. What I mean by this is Catholic sites that are not focused on the Latin Rite.

When I have a question on something with the Latin Rite I know I can go to some of the following:
www.Catholic.com , www.vatican.va , www.newadvent.org , ect.

However these are all “Latinized” and in wanting to gain a clear picture of the differences between the two I would care to know if there is any hard reference to refer to. I know these threads go back and forth with with many opinions and references of events, but is there any way to bring up what this Eastern Church follows and compare that directly to the Code of Cannon Law and the CCC?

I would think that citing from these teachings would clearly point out what the differences are besides cultural practices. There is enough cultural difference in the Latin Rite that no Roman should think anything strange of the Eastern Rites.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

As for differences, I believe the Orthodox Churches retain a number of Old Testament laws related to the issue of blood and cleanliness.

No, though it might seem it. e.g. Any one who has a sore that is oozing blood is not to commune, as having taken in the Eucharist you become a chalice. Would you put the Eucharist in a leaky chalice?

Of course, there are exceptions: if someone is receiving who is bleeding to death (accident site), that’s different. And we have had saints who communed while bleeding-from the wounds they were receiving from the muslims who wanted to desecrate Him (comsuming the gifts was to prevent this).

 

[Seamus_L]

Isa
I believe it goes further than that. I've been told by Greek Orthodox friends, that a woman is not even supposed to enter church during her menstrual cycle, and that for a period after child birth (40 days ?) is not to enter church either.

 

[VARC]

Do Eastern Catholics believe in papal infallibility?

Please excuse my ignorance. I am a Catholic of the Latin rite and for me to even doubt this is a mortal sin that will damn me if I don’t repent. Does the Pope demand the same assent to this dogma of eastern catholics as he does of latin catholics?