How does EC relate to Orthodox?

[Anastasia13]

Ok, so here is how I understood things. You would like everyone to become Catholic because it is the fullness of the faith. I am thinking this is still the case that it would be a happy thing for us to convert (since you still have the fullness of the faith), but will not pressure us as the Balamand Statement indicates, and that there should be a desire to work toward unity among our churches so that we can become one formal entity. Correct?

Do you prostelytize Protestants? Is this similar or different to how you relate to Protestants? I remember reading a Vatican document here that said we are Churches, not churches like the Protestant communions are.

 

[Aramis]

Ok, so here is how I understood things. You would like everyone to become Catholic because it is the fullness of the faith. I am thinking this is still the case that it would be a happy thing for us to convert (since you still have the fullness of the faith), but will not pressure us as the Balamand Statement indicates, and that there should be a desire to work toward unity among our churches so that we can become one formal entity. Correct?

Yep, sounds about right.

Do you prostelytize Protestants? Is this similar or different to how you relate to Protestants? I remember reading a Vatican document here that said we are Churches, not churches like the Protestant communions are.

Yes, the church does take an active role in seeking converts from protestantism and from parachristian groups (like Mormons and JW’s) (note the conciliar definition of Christian from the 1st Ecumenical Council). Doesn’t prevent or prohibit working with them for good causes, either.

The best example of this is the current disintegration of the Anglican/Episcopal Churches and the Anglican Communion. They’re flying apart at the seams. THe Church has been making overtures for corporate unifications to several of the more traditionalist Anglo-catholic groups. Some have, in fact, come over as part of this.

There are now Anglican Use Catholics in Ordinariates - which are dioceses headed by a priest or bishop - with overlapping boundaries to the regular Roman bishops. Not a separate church, per se, but definitely a distinct subset of the Roman Church. They keep their distinctive liturgies, married clergy (now and into the future, even). Some Orthodox feel this violates the spirit of the Balamand accord by creating a new uniate body. (I’ve heard commentary from Orthodox clerics about it. ) It doesn’t violate the letter, however.

 

[Peter_J]

… Churches, not churches …

Is this the equivalent of air quotes?

 

[Anastasia13]

Is this the equivalent of air quotes?

Not sure what that means. I was referring to the Fourth and Fifth questions on this when I spoke of Churches, not churches.
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH: RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html

 

[Peter_J]

^^ No matter; my question was entirely off-topic.

 

[Peter_J]

P.S. Another thought (sorry for not presenting them in a more organized fashion ) relating to

Why do you feel like you are banging your head?

is that Orthodox seem to feel (even if they don’t say it in so many words) that, as a Catholic who chooses not to leave Catholicism for Orthodoxy, I’m just as bad (from their p.o.v.) as someone who leaves Orthodoxy for Catholicism.

 

[Apotheoun]

I’ve never heard this before. Please tell me more.

The following is from an interview with Cardinal Kasper, who at the time was the head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity:

Our Sunday Visitor: “The Russian Orthodox does not accept that the Roman Catholic Church, the Latin rite Church can evangelize in Russia.”

Cardinal Kasper: "This problem is linked with the Russian Orthodox understanding of their canonical territory. The Catholic Church recognizes that Russia has a longstanding Christian tradition and culture. We recognize all the sacraments, the episcopate and the priesthood of the Russian Orthodox Church. Thus, while Catholic Christians living in Russia may clearly give witness of their Catholic faith, there cannot be an evangelization as such, as this can only be undertaken in a pagan context. Therefore, it is not our policy or strategy to convert the Orthodox to the Catholic Church. There may be some priests who do something imprudent – you can never exclude such a thing – but this is not the Catholic Church’s policy. We do not undertake missionary work in Russia as we do in the pagan regions of the world. We want to collaborate with the Russian Orthodox in missionary work and in evangelization, which is needed in modern Russia after more then 70 years of atheistic propaganda and education.

If one member of the Orthodox faithful, by reason of his or her conscience, wants to become Catholic, we cannot shut the door to that person. There are also Catholics who become Orthodox. This is a question of religious freedom, and we have to recognize and to respect it from both sides."

 

[Apotheoun]

P.S. Another thought (sorry for not presenting them in a more organized fashion ) relating to

is that Orthodox seem to feel (even if they don’t say it in so many words) that, as a Catholic who chooses not to leave Catholicism for Orthodoxy, I’m just as bad (from their p.o.v.) as someone who leaves Orthodoxy for Catholicism.

I have many Orthodox friends and none of them have ever made me feel that way. I have only gotten a sense of that from Orthodox I have interacted with solely on the internet.

 

[suissemissed]

Anastasia,

I think the confusion regarding “Do Catholics encourage Eastern/Oriental Orthodox to convert?” is based on two problems. First is the use of the word “convert.” This word can only be used in its fullest meaning in a non-Christian setting. Atheists and Muslims “convert” to Catholicism; Protestants (which I was) have more of a “translation”, usually, as most are already living a life of Christian prayer and have been baptized, but lack other sacraments; Orthodox (Eastern and Oriental), however, share ALL the sacraments and liturgical life of the Catholic Church, so even using the term “translation” in their case could be stressing it too much. “Switching Churches” or “coming into full communion” might be closer to the mark.

The second problem is that while the Church does encourage ALL non-Catholics to be in full communion with Her, it specifically* rejects* the “uniatism” model used in previous centuries to accomplish this with separated Eastern Christians. THAT is what the Church means when it says it doesn’t encourage Orthodox to “convert.” Now what is uniatism? It is a form of union where Eastern Christians relinquish their unique liturgical and spiritual heritage in favor of Latinization. (“Uniatism” by Cyril Korolevsky is a great book you can read to learn about this not-so-good method of Church reunification - it’s available for purchase on this page, just scroll down until you see it).

Currently, the Catholic Church invites all Orthodox into full communion with Her, and when one does individually accept this invitation, they are not asked to join the Latin Church - rather, they join the Eastern Catholic Church most similar to the Church they just left. For instance, Ukrainian Orthodox would join the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Antiochian Orthodox would join the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, etc, etc.

Hope that helps

 

[Zekariya]

Currently, the Catholic Church invites all Orthodox into full communion with Her, and when one does individually accept this invitation, they are not asked to join the Latin Church - rather, they join the Eastern Catholic Church most similar to the Church they just left. For instance, Ukrainian Orthodox would join the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Antiochian Orthodox would join the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, etc, etc.

Hope that helps

I was baptized and chrismated in the Antiochian Orthodox Church therefore, when I came into full communion with Rome, I was/am considered a Melkite Catholic (though I was chrismated and joined the Coptic Orthodox Church after my Antiochian parish closed).

PS I am still partial to Pope St Cyril of Alexandria’s teaching of the One Incarnate Nature of God the Word. And I use the Agpeya for my prayers.

“Wherefore, we say that the two natures were united, from which there is the one and only Son and Lord, Jesus Christ, as we accept in our thoughts; but after the union, since the distinction into two is done away with, we believe that there is one nature of the Son, as one, however, one who became man and was made flesh.” - Pope St Cyril of Alexandria, Letter 40

 

[suissemissed]

I was baptized and chrismated in the Antiochian Orthodox Church therefore, when I came into full communion with Rome, I was/am considered a Melkite Catholic (though I was chrismated and joined the Coptic Orthodox Church after my Antiochian parish closed).

PS I am still partial to Pope St Cyril of Alexandria’s teaching of the One Incarnate Nature of God the Word. And I use the Agpeya for my prayers.

“Wherefore, we say that the two natures were united, from which there is the one and only Son and Lord, Jesus Christ, as we accept in our thoughts; but after the union, since the distinction into two is done away with, we believe that there is one nature of the Son, as one, however, one who became man and was made flesh.” - Pope St Cyril of Alexandria, Letter 40

Wow, so you’ve been Chalcedonian Orthodox, non-Chalcedonian Orthodox, and Catholic in your lifetime! The only major apostolic Church you haven’t been a part of would be the Church of the East, yeah?

 

[Zekariya]

Wow, so you’ve been Chalcedonian Orthodox, non-Chalcedonian Orthodox, and Catholic in your lifetime! The only major apostolic Church you haven’t been a part of would be the Church of the East, yeah?

Yes, and the non-Chalcedonian in me would never permit it. I stand with St Cyril all the way.

PS I have read all of St Cyril’s tomes against Nestorius.

 

[AnthonyJ]

I got St Cyril’s Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah for Christmas. I am looking forward to reading it.

Yes, and the non-Chalcedonian in me would never permit it. I stand with St Cyril all the way.

PS I have read all of St Cyril’s tomes against Nestorius.

 

[Zekariya]

I got St Cyril’s Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah for Christmas. I am looking forward to reading it.

St Cyril is a wonderful writer and Theologian. I’m sure you’ll like.

 

[Tomdstone]

Peter J;10298661:

Your second question,

is pretty easy to answer, because the Catholic Church has a policy not

to encourage Orthodox to convert. QUOTE]

Rome has done missions to the eastern churches since the schism,by franciscans ,dominicans ,jesuits etc

Has Rome agreed not to go on missions to convert Eastern christians anymore?

I think in one of the joint statements it talks about both EO and RC not wanting to convert the other to their church anymore
Has the Catholic Church changed its previous teaching that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church? If there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, why shouldn’t Catholics in charity for those outside the Church and who cannot be saved, try to save them by converting them so that they can attain salvation? BTW, as far as Catholics are concerned isn’t it heresy to say that the Church can grant divorces or that Mary was not immaculately conceived or that the Pope is not the infallible head of the Church or that there is no purgatory?

 

[Peter_J]

Has the Catholic Church changed its previous teaching that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church? If there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, why shouldn’t Catholics in charity for those outside the Church and who cannot be saved, try to save them by converting them so that they can attain salvation?

My view is that that was never a correct teaching (at least not in the way you are understanding it); so it isn’t a matter of the Catholic Church changing its previous teaching. Rather, a matter of cracking-down on an erroneous interpretation (Feenyism, more or less).

Of course, some traditionalist Catholics would disagree with my view.

 

[Anastasia13]

My view is that that was never a correct teaching (at least not in the way you are understanding it); so it isn’t a matter of the Catholic Church changing its previous teaching. Rather, a matter of cracking-down on an erroneous interpretation (Feenyism, more or less).

Of course, some traditionalist Catholics would disagree with my view.

My understanding was that if the Catholic Church taught it, then it could never not be correct. This may need another thread…

 

[Tomdstone]

My view is that that was never a correct teaching (at least not in the way you are understanding it); so it isn’t a matter of the Catholic Church changing its previous teaching. Rather, a matter of cracking-down on an erroneous interpretation (Feenyism, more or less).

Of course, some traditionalist Catholics would disagree with my view.

Pope Benedict XIV, Nuper ad nos, March 16, 1743, Profession of Faith: “This faith of the Catholic Church, without which no one can be saved, and which of my own accord I now profess and truly hold…”
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439:
“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.”

 

[Zekariya]

My view is that that was never a correct teaching (at least not in the way you are understanding it); so it isn’t a matter of the Catholic Church changing its previous teaching. Rather, a matter of cracking-down on an erroneous interpretation (Feenyism, more or less).

Of course, some traditionalist Catholics would disagree with my view.

Note that Feeny did not believe in baptism of desire (ie “I want to be baptized”) or baptism of blood (ie martyrdom). In the third century Church had already confirmed those two baptisms. He did not believe that protestants or Orthodox could be saved (only those in communion with Rome could be saved). One can hold to a view that someone must have, at minimum, faith in Jesus Christ in order to be saved and not be condemned for Feenyism.

I won’t go further since this isn’t the point of this thread. I just wanted to clarify.

 

[Tomdstone]

I won’t go further since this isn’t the point of this thread. I just wanted to clarify.

As I understand it to be, the question before us is how EC relates to Orthodox. I would suppose that the EC accept the supremacy of the Roman Pope whereas the Orthodox do not and that is one big difference. Another difference would concern the question of granting a Church approved divorce.