Excellent question, with as much basis in reality as the OP’s hypothetical.
Actually a lot of the Orthodox hierarchy find the existence of the Eastern Catholic churches offensive, and have asked for their disbandment. Doing so very well could improve the relationship between the two churches. Russia is sometimes especially hardline on this. It’s really not going to happen though, as much as Moscow may want it.
It may be hearsay, and it may be some kind of Russian pipe dream, but given MP’s track record, I would not go so far as to say it’s couldn’t be true. I mean, let’s face it: MP and its subjects are not exactly enamored of the UGCC, are they?
Neither are a lot of Latin Rite Catholics. Yet we soldier on.I mean, let’s face it: MP and its subjects are not exactly enamored of the UGCC, are they?
As has been said a number of times “our vocation as Eastern Catholics is to disappear”, I really don’t think the original question is to far fetched.Neither are a lot of Latin Rite Catholics. Yet we soldier on.
The quote, infrequently repeated by some, is from an EC bishop. It anticipates a future reunion of EOs and Catholics, at which point separate jurisdictions would no longer be necessary for ECCs and their EO counterparts. The bishop neglected to consider churches like the Maronites, or the broader implications of the existence of overlapping jurisdictions, or the inaptness of the phrase when talking of regions where the ECs considerably outnumber or even antedate their EO counterparts. He really didn’t consider anythign about the administrative nature of a re-united church.
If we as Eastern Catholics are to disappear, ( be reabsorbed into Orthodoxy), I hardly think to OP is far fetched.
As I said, the framing of reunion as reabsorption is highly problematic, and makes the OP far fetched.
If anything were to happen (and if it does, it’s not going to be anytime even relatively soon, meaning that none of us will be around to see it), I think it safe to assume that the East will go East, the Orient will go Orient, and the Latins will remain as they are.
Nor could the Italo-Greeks (aka Italo-Albanians). In some ways, it’s our loss (and before anyone asks, no, I’m NOT expounding on that further).
I find it highly questionable that such a thing would ever happen while the Roman Church is still lacking a solid understanding of Orthodox ecclesiology on the part of not only the Roman Pope, but of all of the people surrounding him, and the laity. Speaking as a member of the Orthodox Papal Church
D), I have encountered more than enough strange conceptions of what it must be like to be “Orthodox with a Pope” from my Roman acquaintances that I can say without malice (more with concern) that our bishops would probably be driven nuts by the prospect, let alone the reality, of receiving however many millions of people who have been indoctrinated for centuries to believe in Rome-centric Church hierarchical governance (with its universal jurisdiction and all the rest) and would suddenly find themselves entering into churches for whom such suppositions have not formed our ecclesiology.
Try and get Athos to agree to that.One thing (definitely not the only thing) that complicates this thread is that many webpages use the term “Eastern Catholic” to mean only the Greek Catholics (a.k.a. Byzantines Catholics – UGCC, Melkites, etc.) but not e.g. the Maronites. The people UncleBill spoke with may (or may not) have been using the term in that sense.
Exactly. This is what I was trying to get across in post #12.
Here’s something else to keep in mind: it’s easy to imagine that all of your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, great-great-grandchildren, etc, will belong to the same church that you belong to.
Not sure that I get this - especially the footnote.
