Husband talking about the Greek Orthodox priesthood

[Phillip_Rolfes]

Thank you for your reply Philip. I would never tell people they are going to hell nor make threats about any sort of punishment that may or may not await them after death. I know God will Judge everyone according to their hearts which is something I cannot look into so I just worry about myself for the most part. Regardless of this I try not to be someone that is light-hearted about sin. Schism whether you like the word or not is a sin against the faith and one of which I felt was being downplayed in this thread. Sins are also never excused even though someone thinks they are justified due to the wrong actions of others in the past. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and so a Rite for a Rite leaves the whole Catholic Church divided.

Now I know people on the forum are very protective of their Rites as well we all should be. We would not be in them unless we loved them and I make no claims here on any Rite being superior to another nor am I trying to justify the actions of those that have done so in the past. I personally love the East and the West and would hate to have the two mixed together or one removed for another. However last time I checked schism was not exclusive to any particular Rite and so my detest for schism is also not exclusive to any particular Rite. I’m not making the statement to not be schismatic because I think all Catholics should be Latinized but rather because I believe all Catholics regardless of Rite should submit to the Pope.

Please if you could be so kind as to show me a source for this.

God Bless.

I’d start by recommending Vatican II’s documents on Religious Freedom as well as that on the Eastern Catholic Churches. There are also numerous other documents on ecumenical relations that state such things explicitly as well as implicitly.

If you read the documents on ecumenical relations with the Orthodox, as well as on relations with the Eastern Catholic Churches, you will find little to no reference to “submission” to the Pope of Rome, but “communion” with him.

On a purely philosophical/logical level it makes no sense to force someone to join or remain in a religion. God does not force us to love Him, why should the Church force or coerce us to become members?

Lastly, as Alex pointe out, the Church has abandoned the language of “schismatic.” Nowhere in any of the ecumenical documents of today will you find references to “schismatics.” It is not a matter of personal taste. The Church herself has abandoned it. Perhaps it is your own personal taste that clings to it. That Catholic Church, in the CCC, recognizes that the Orthodox Churches are fully church and that they possess the full means of salvation. They do not exist in a state of schism from us, so much as we exist in a state of schism from one another. Sadly the sins of man, both on the grassroots level and at the level of our Church leaders, have kept our Churches apart for far too long. Our leaders have called us to repent of the mistakes of the past and thoroughly examine the teachings of the Patristic Fathers in order to form a more authentic expression of our Faith, the role of the Pope of Rome, and the communion of Churches. Check out some of the past postings of our brother, Mardukm. He is amazingly well-informed, is steeped in the Fathers, Church history, and Ecclesial documents.

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

Alex, I thought about you tonight.

I attended a TLM and during the homily, the priest called Protestant and Eastern Orthodox beliefs heresies.

How sad. I wonder if he actually knew anything about Eastern Orthodox beliefs. Such an attitude is the reason that so many Eastern Catholics have suffered when they insisted on upholding the Orthodox traditions of our Churches.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Not really… one of my best friend’s was married on Saturday, ordained to the Diaconate on Sunday and was ordained to the Holy Priesthood on the following Sunday.

Ordination took place in Rome and presided over by one of the Ruthenian Bishop’s from the USA:thumbsup:

This is the canon for the Ukrainian Church (not Ruthenian) but it comes from the CCEO which should apply to all Eastern Catholic Churches

Can. 99 (CCEO c. 758 §3) Under ordinary circumstances, married candidates can be
ordained a minimum of one year after exemplary married life, which bears witness to the
domestic Church, unless the eparchial bishop, under other circumstances, determines otherwise.

As noted, the Bishop can determine otherwise. There must be a need for him to be a deacon immediately that is why the Bishop waived the 1 year rule.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I am coming to this conversation late, and this may have been mentioned before.

But if the man’s intention in transferring from the Latin Sui Iuris church to another Sui Iuris church was for ordination, his request for transfer will surely be denied.

If he was to transfer for other legitimate reasons (a genuine conversion of the heart, a love of the spirituality), and eventually discovered a vocation, he would probably have a chance at it (it has happened many times before). But this man already knows he wants to be a priest, he would have to hide that from both bishops in his application to transfer.

But if this man wants to be Orthodox, what in the world are people suggesting he be an Eastern catholic for? To me that suggests that he is not sincerely interested in becoming Orthodox, but just likes the ‘ceremony’ of it. Eastern catholicism is not a substitute for Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy is not a substitute fpor Eastern cattholicism. They are two different things.

I would not respect a man who wanted to be clergy in a church that he did not agree 100% with it’s theology. If I was EC wouldn’t want a priest that did not believe in the Papal dogmas, that lacks integrity. In just the same way I wouldn’t want an Orthodox priest who only became Orthodox because he couldn’t be a priest in the church he believes in, that lacks integrity too.

Why encourage anyone to be a cafeteria catholic? It blows me away.

The transfer for the purpose of Ordination isn’t a black-and-white rule. Some men who never transfer canonically and go to an Eastern parish for years and live the Eastern life and spirituality, then seek Ordination can transfer just in time for Ordination. But again that is when he has already been going to an Eastern parish for years, not when he shows up to an Eastern parish one day and 6 months later will seek Ordination.

 

[mardukm]

How sad. I wonder if he actually knew anything about Eastern Orthodox beliefs. Such an attitude is the reason that so many Eastern Catholics have suffered when they insisted on upholding the Orthodox traditions of our Churches.

Very well said, brother Phillip!!!

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Hesychios]

How sad. I wonder if he actually knew anything about Eastern Orthodox beliefs. Such an attitude is the reason that so many Eastern Catholics have suffered when they insisted on upholding the Orthodox traditions of our Churches.

Which is why it is less surprising for that to come from a Latin traditionalist.

But from a priest, in this day and age?

 

[Patchunky]

This is the canon for the Ukrainian Church (not Ruthenian) but it comes from the CCEO which should apply to all Eastern Catholic Churches

Can. 99 (CCEO c. 758 §3) Under ordinary circumstances, married candidates can be
ordained a minimum of one year after exemplary married life, which bears witness to the
domestic Church, unless the eparchial bishop, under other circumstances, determines otherwise.

As noted, the Bishop can determine otherwise. There must be a need for him to be a deacon immediately that is why the Bishop waived the 1 year rule.

Gee, it’s S.O.P. in Ukraine and Slovakia. Ordination to the Diaconate takes place the day after the wedding and to the Holy Priesthood the following Sunday:thumbsup:

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Alex, I thought about you tonight.

I attended a TLM and during the homily, the priest called Protestant and Eastern Orthodox beliefs heresies.

I re-read your post - thank you for thinking of me!

As the celebrant was a priest, and not a pope, I believe I’m within my rights to say that what he said about the Orthodox is both wrong and vicious.

BTW, the Orthodox do have a Western Rite where the TLM is used (minus a few later Latin accoutrements! ).

Have a great day!

Alex

 

[Alexander_Roman]

How sad. I wonder if he actually knew anything about Eastern Orthodox beliefs. Such an attitude is the reason that so many Eastern Catholics have suffered when they insisted on upholding the Orthodox traditions of our Churches.

That is a very insightful point and this is the first time I’ve ever read it expressed as well as you have, Revered Master Beadsman Extraordinaire!

Alex

 

[hazcompat]

I find that quite interesting.

I find that disconcerting!

peace

 

[Alexander_Roman]

It can be both.

Alex

 

[Poor_Soul]

I’d start by recommending Vatican II’s documents on Religious Freedom as well as that on the Eastern Catholic Churches. There are also numerous other documents on ecumenical relations that state such things explicitly as well as implicitly.:

Philip you made the claim and so therefore you should provide the source. If you dont then its just your opinion which is not fact.

If you read the documents on ecumenical relations with the Orthodox, as well as on relations with the Eastern Catholic Churches, you will find little to no reference to “submission” to the Pope of Rome, but “communion” with him.:

If such a dispensation exists then I would like you to provide the source for it. I’m sure you could find them

On a purely philosophical/logical level it makes no sense to force someone to join or remain in a religion. God does not force us to love Him, why should the Church force or coerce us to become members?:

No one is forcing people to remain in a religion they do not believe is the truth, however just because they dont believe it is the truth is not justification to leave the truth. The truth hurts my friend and this does not give anyone right to leave it. And your right God does not force us to Love Him but he also does not allow us to make choices free of consequences.

Lastly, as Alex pointe out, the Church has abandoned the language of “schismatic.” Nowhere in any of the ecumenical documents of today will you find references to “schismatics.” It is not a matter of personal taste. The Church herself has abandoned it. Perhaps it is your own personal taste that clings to it. That Catholic Church, in the CCC, recognizes that the Orthodox Churches are fully church and that they possess the full means of salvation. They do not exist in a state of schism from us, so much as we exist in a state of schism from one another. Sadly the sins of man, both on the grassroots level and at the level of our Church leaders, have kept our Churches apart for far too long. Our leaders have called us to repent of the mistakes of the past and thoroughly examine the teachings of the Patristic Fathers in order to form a more authentic expression of our Faith, the role of the Pope of Rome, and the communion of Churches. Check out some of the past postings of our brother, Mardukm. He is amazingly well-informed, is steeped in the Fathers, Church history, and Ecclesial documents.

The only thing you or Alex have done is given your opinion that the Church has “abandoned” the language of schismatic. I unlike Alex and yourself have provided the CCC were it clearly states what schism is and by said definition why the Orthodox are still schismatic.

**Pope Boniface VIII, A.D. 1294-1303:

“If, then, the Greeks or others say that they were not committed to the care of Peter and his successors, they necessarily confess that they are not of the sheep of Christ; for the Lord says, in John, that there is one fold, one shepherd, and one only.”

Ex cathedra: “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is wholly necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff. The Lateran, November 14th, in our eighth year. As a perpetual memorial of this matter.” (Unam Sanctam, A.D. 1302)**

Now please Philip and Alex provide me with sources from the Catholic Church and present day that say we The Catholic Church have done away with what was said by Pope Boniface VIII. I will be patiently waiting.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

You Poor Soul, what you have done is make an inference on the basis of a theological definition of 'schismatic."

No one is saying that there is no such thing as “schismatic.”

If you were to join a traditional RC group that commemorates the pope, but considers Vatican II as being wrong-minded, then you would definitely be classified as “schismatic.”

Where in the CCC, or in any contemporary Catholic Church documents, statements by contemporary popes and, even more specifically, the RC-Orthodox dialogue is the term “schismatic” applied to the Orthodox?

But you’ve clearly not read St Augustine where he talks about how the descendants of any heresy or schism cannot be charged with the sin of their forefathers.

Bl Pope John XXIII said that there was fault on both sides in the schism of 1054. Pope Paul VI and EP Athenagoras lifted the mutual excommunications of 1054 AD.

So since you are in the business of extending the reasoning based on this or that event/definition, how do you continue regarding the Orthodox as “schismatic” when a) Rome herself does not apply that opprobrious term to the Orthodox; b) the excommunications have been lifted and; c) Rome herself openly favours the Orthodox over the loyal Eastern Catholics!

I cannot imagine how Rome would call, for example, the Russian Orthodox Church “schismatic” when whatever the ROC tells Rome to do with respect to the Eastern Catholics, Rome does.

This shows that not only does Rome exist in close, mutual friendship with the Russian Orthodox Church, it values that friendship well above the loyalty of the Eastern Catholic Churches and her martyrs/confessors!

So if the Russian Orthodox Church are, as you say, truly “schismatics” in the eyes of Rome, the only thing I want to know is - where do Eastern Catholics go to sign up as “schismatics” too?

We would obviously get much better treatment by Rome, if we were schismatics too!

So please don’t be too shocked if I’m not overly concerned with the political machinations of either the first or third Romes and how they title each other, whether “heretic” or “schismatic.”

What term would you use to describe Eastern Catholics, given how we are treated by Rome . . . There would be no problem if things were as they were under Pope Boniface VIII of happy memory!

Stop with your “patiently waiting,” wake up and smell the coffee. Are you on the side of the Particular Eastern Catholic Churches or not? That is the real question.

Alex

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

You Poor Soul, what you have done is make an inference on the basis of a theological definition of 'schismatic."

No one is saying that there is no such thing as “schismatic.”

If you were to join a traditional RC group that commemorates the pope, but considers Vatican II as being wrong-minded, then you would definitely be classified as “schismatic.”

Where in the CCC, or in any contemporary Catholic Church documents, statements by contemporary popes and, even more specifically, the RC-Orthodox dialogue is the term “schismatic” applied to the Orthodox?

But you’ve clearly not read St Augustine where he talks about how the descendants of any heresy or schism cannot be charged with the sin of their forefathers.

Bl Pope John XXIII said that there was fault on both sides in the schism of 1054. Pope Paul VI and EP Athenagoras lifted the mutual excommunications of 1054 AD.

So since you are in the business of extending the reasoning based on this or that event/definition, how do you continue regarding the Orthodox as “schismatic” when a) Rome herself does not apply that opprobrious term to the Orthodox; b) the excommunications have been lifted and; c) Rome herself openly favours the Orthodox over the loyal Eastern Catholics!

I cannot imagine how Rome would call, for example, the Russian Orthodox Church “schismatic” when whatever the ROC tells Rome to do with respect to the Eastern Catholics, Rome does.

This shows that not only does Rome exist in close, mutual friendship with the Russian Orthodox Church, it values that friendship well above the loyalty of the Eastern Catholic Churches and her martyrs/confessors!

So if the Russian Orthodox Church are, as you say, truly “schismatics” in the eyes of Rome, the only thing I want to know is - where do Eastern Catholics go to sign up as “schismatics” too?

We would obviously get much better treatment by Rome, if we were schismatics too!

So please don’t be too shocked if I’m not overly concerned with the political machinations of either the first or third Romes and how they title each other, whether “heretic” or “schismatic.”

What term would you use to describe Eastern Catholics, given how we are treated by Rome . . . There would be no problem if things were as they were under Pope Boniface VIII of happy memory!

Stop with your “patiently waiting,” wake up and smell the coffee. Are you on the side of the Particular Eastern Catholic Churches or not? That is the real question.

Alex

There is nothing but thunderous applaus coming from my corner! :clapping:

Poor Soul, I have provided you with a number of sources and suggestions. As I said before, such things are sometimes stated explicitly and sometimes implicitly. In fact actions, especially in this case, often speak louder than words. The history of relations between Rome, Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox is also enough to validate the points that Alex and I are making. If you want specific references, then I suggest you read the sources I’ve suggested. If you cannot be bothered to read them, then you have no right to insist that I (re)read them in order to reinforce my point. The whole point of discussion is not that we prove our point, but that we look at the documents together and try and discern together what they are saying. If you will not look at the documents, then this discussion is over.

On a side note, I suggest that if this discussion is to continue we ought to start a new thread. This has nothing to do with the dear lady who began the thread asking about her husband’s desire to enter the Greek Orthodox priesthood.

 

[Aramis]

Which is why it is less surprising for that to come from a Latin traditionalist.

But from a priest, in this day and age?

Many of the priests in the Traditionalist movement hold that the current ecumenical stance towards orthodoxy is heretical, and an abandonment of EENS. The only thing holding some of them in union is that they interpret eens as “outside the communion with the pope nothing has sanctifying grace.” Others hold that the church is teaching error in accepting the validity of the Orthodox.

Most of them haven’t read the section on the Orthodox in the 1917 canon law… it’s only a little more strict than current.

EENS has not, at least post 1890, been officially used to declaim the Orthodox. Unofficially, and even at the level of national councils, declamations of the Orthodox have been both far sterner, and far less oriented towards rapprochement.

The mindset of many Traditionalists is one that is potentially the biggest hurdle the church has: “No teaching may change; every teaching is dogmatic.” And it’s been the thorn in the side of the EC’s as well as the pro-catholic elements in Orthodoxy… a large and vocal minority claims as dogmatic things which are not, and jumps up and down screaming about it when the real dogmatic declaration is used to justify more moderate teachings.

EENS says outside the church there is no grace. The teachings on Baptism state that a valid baptism unites one to the church, opening one to grace… But many priests don’t know or understand the canonical definition of baptism as uniting one to the church. Some popes have taught that the Orthodox are graceless, but they have not been so declared by the councils.

And the church still has an issue with the power of the councils: is the council the supreme earthly force, or the pope?

 

[Hesychios]

We would obviously get much better treatment by Rome, if we were schismatics too!

That is entirely possible, perhaps even likely.

 

[hazcompat]

That is entirely possible, perhaps even likely.

Matthew 5: [43] You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thy enemy. [44] But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you: [45] That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust.

[46] For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? do not even the publicans this? [47] And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this? [48] Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.

peace

 

[Formosus]

So if the Russian Orthodox Church are, as you say, truly “schismatics” in the eyes of Rome, the only thing I want to know is - where do Eastern Catholics go to sign up as “schismatics” too?

We would obviously get much better treatment by Rome, if we were schismatics too!

Alex

Our church could always jump onboard with the KP or with the Ecumenical Patriarch.

I have to agree with Hesychios, if the man doesn’t want to be a catholic, and wants to be Orthodox then he should pursue that . Eastern catholicism isn’t the best of both worlds or some middle compromise between Latin Catholicisim and orthodoxy. It is a whole other ball game .

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Our church could always jump onboard with the KP or with the Ecumenical Patriarch.

I have to agree with Hesychios, if the man doesn’t want to be a catholic, and wants to be Orthodox then he should pursue that . Eastern catholicism isn’t the best of both worlds or some middle compromise between Latin Catholicisim and orthodoxy. It is a whole other ball game .

I like you!

Alex

 

[5Loaves]

I’m sorry 5Loaves but I must take offense to some of this. Our friend has been close to our family for the last 5 years. He is orthodox benedictine and his spiritual father (located in another state) has been a part of the russian orthodoxy for 40 years.
Unfortunately, the monastery he was a part of in central ohio was a sham and the man who ran the place a fool and liar (and a whole host of unsavory characteristics), but who still has his hands in much of the orthodox community. So our friend cannot participate locally without running into this man.

I thank you for having concern about our marriage , but with all due respect, I don’t think you have the authority to know what God’s plan is I do take advice from our friend (who is in fact 30 and has been a part of the orthodox church for a decade and a monk for 6 years), not ‘some college age’ kid strutting around in a robe. He is the one trying to get us to contact the right people. He is not driving anything but being an educated support system. BUT. While he is a close friend, I’ve come to this board to receive opinions from other knowledgable people as well.

I’m sorry.

Let me say my response is influenced by being old enough to be your mom and possibly your grandmother. In your first post you said “I married my husband 3 months ago …But I’m still feeling utterly overwhelmed… I think what concerns me the most is I already don’t feel like I’m a good Catholic with my personal struggles…So I guess you could say I’m fairly terrified of what it means to be a good orthodox wife–particularly one of a priest…”

These are words to worry a baba. When you start a thread with red flags you might expect people to be concerned for you and to share those concerns.

Initially you painted a hazy picture about the monks, in which it sounded like you didn’t have enough information about the situation to be more specific. There are both groups who call themselves a “Catholic Church” and have no connection to the Holy See, and those who call themselves “Orthodox” and have no connection to a true Orthodox Church. I posted my concern that you clarify that you’re involved with people who are truly Orthodox. You say they are. Excellent.

I’m happy to hear this is a Russian Orthodox spiritual father they are going to visit. I’m Russian Catholic and am often in both ROCOR and OCA Churches here. They’ve been very good to me.

I’m sorry about the struggle your monk friend finds himself in. I’m sure he appreciates the friendship he has with you and your husband during this tough transition in his vocation. I will pray for him and for all those who are affected by the troubles in his former community.