Is there a real chance of communion between the Catholic Church and the orthodox?

[JW55]

I see no problem with clerical marrying( my personal opinion) since this was part of the early traditions of the church. However, correct me if I am wrong on the following: It is my understanding that in the Orthodox tradition that if a priest is to participate in a Divine Liturgy the following day, they are prohibited from having intimate relationships with their wife the night before. Since Orthodox do not traditionally have Divine Liturgy on s daily basis it would not necessarily create a major problem. However, in the Latin tradition a priest may offer Mass on a daily Basis. ‘This would obviously would create issues of Priests in the Latin tradition if they were allowed to marry.

 

[Isaac14]

But as you know, the Orthodox do have married clergy, even the Russian Orthodox.

Being Orthodox, I’m fully aware that the East, both Catholic and Orthodox has married clergy as the norm. The problem is that in the US this right was denied to Eastern Catholics so forcefully as to cause two majors defections of Eastern Catholics to the Orthodox Church.

So, telling the Orthodox there is a model of what to expect in terms of reunion by looking at the EC churches doesn’t exactly provide us with the reassurance you think it does.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

As for married clergy, this was the norm in the first few centuries of the Church.

This link should be helpful. East was who changed the practice of this, not the West. However, that does NOT make eastern practice illegitimate.

 

[Isaac14]

It is my understanding that in the Orthodox tradition that if a priest is to participate in a Divine Liturgy the following day, they are prohibited from having intimate relationships with their wife the night before. Since Orthodox do not traditionally have Divine Liturgy on s daily basis it would not necessarily create a major problem. However, in the Latin tradition a priest may offer Mass on a daily Basis. ‘This would obviously would create issues of Priests in the Latin tradition if they were allowed to marry.

I do believe you’re correct - Eastern priests fast from all things the night before the Divine Liturgy. Monasteries are the only place I think it would be common for daily Eucharist in the East - and that only outside of Great Lent.

As an Eastern Christian, I certainly wouldn’t expect the west to change their practice of clerical celibacy. The dynamics of parish life are so different (it seems to me - at least here in the USA) between East and West that a lot of other factors would have to be addressed for marriage clergy in the West to make sense.

 

[ziapueblo]

On such a lengthy thread, I would be curious, has the exchange changed your opinion, modified it, or not changed your initial ideas/opinion since the initial post?

Unfortunately, my opinion has not changed. If it happens, it will purely be political and no real deep, theological discussion. The Patriarchs and the Pope of Rome will get together occasionally to show a sign of “unity” but Latins will be Latins, Greeks will be Greeks and all will go about their daily business.

Here is a pretty good discussion from Reason & Theology a few weeks ago:

After all, Jesus specifically changed Simon the fisherman’s name to Peter, then built the Church upon Peter, and gave him the keys, and three times commanded Peter to tend and feed the entire flock, not just part of it.

Has been discussed ad nauseam and no one has or will change their minds on this.

Again, at the heart of the split is the Orthodox refusal to accept papal authority.

If “papal authority” means universal and immediate jurisdiction over the Church, there will be no communion.

We have examples of eastern rites that are in full communion with Rome. They retain their liturgical traditions yet in full communion with r’the Vicar of Christ on Earth.

I was Byzantine Catholic for many years in a highly latinized parish even when Rome has called the Eastern Catholics to revert back to their ecclesiastical heritage.

Also, a “rite” is so much more than a nice Liturgy with chanting and incense:

1. The Eastern heritage is more than just liturgy

Certainly, the tendency to reduce the specific heritage of the Eastern Churches to just its liturgical dimension should not be encouraged. The attraction exerted by the sacredness of the rites, the intense emotion arising from the poetic dimension of the texts, has possibly led to an excessive emphasis of the exterior or emotional aspect, an easy place of refuge for those who deny the liturgy its necessary link with life. This is what has sometimes led the same Eastern Catholics to perceive only the liturgical patrimony as being specifically their own, conforming themselves instead, for the other aspects of spirituality, to the Western sensibility considered as common to the Universal Church. Rather, the value of Eastern theologies and spiritualities, understood as part of the undivided heritage of the Universal Church, is a fairly recent discovery, as is the emergence of the importance of particular disciplines.

The practice of the Eastern liturgy without its entire heritage flowing into it, as into its highest expression, would risk reducing it to pure superficiality.

Read the rest here:

Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches | EWTN

ZP

 

[Gab123]

So, telling the Orthodox there is a model of what to expect in terms of reunion by looking at the EC churches doesn’t exactly provide us with the reassurance you think it does.

All the sheep in the whole wide world belong to Jesus.

When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.” Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.” The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.

 

[Gab123]

Has been discussed ad nauseam and no one has or will change their minds on this.

Yes. It will take great humility to solve this one. Jesus gave authority to Peter.

 

[Isaac14]

All the sheep in the whole wide world belong to Jesus.

In other words, ignore the abuses and submit?

 

[Gab123]

In other words, ignore the abuses and submit?

Yes. As for sexual abuse, realize that sex abuse cases also abound in the Orthodox clergy. But financially, in the U.S. the lawyers are focusing on Catholic Church cases that happened decades ago in places that have $$$.

Orthodox, Protestant, & Jewish Clergy & Sexual Abuse | Dave Armstrong

Child Sexual Abused by Greek Orthodox Clergy | Child Victims Act

Russian Priest Sentenced to 17 Years Over Sexual Abuse of Children

Serbian Orthodox Church Rocked By Sex Scandal

Russian priest who raped boys at least 46 times jailed for 17 years — RT Russia & Former Soviet Union

 

[Isaac14]

Yes. As for sexual abuse, realize that sex abuse cases also abound in the Orthodox clerg

Non sequitur.

I was speaking to abuses of Eastern Catholics in the USA by Latin churchmen.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Has been discussed ad nauseam and no one has or will change their minds on this.

I would not go as far. Some have changed their minds based on this, past version of myself included.

If “papal authority” means universal and immediate jurisdiction over the Church, there will be no communion.

In God, everything is possible.

In other words, ignore the abuses and submit?

You do not protest against abuses, but against their future potential. Big difference. Apostles did not go and say “but Lord, what if Peter goes insane or something?”. Even if you do not agree with this interpretation of verses, this exact reasoning does not say much. What about abuses done by Bishops? We can’t just ignore all Bishops from now on because of them. This is similar position to sedevacantists who view Vatican II as abuse from Latin clergy of the time.

Yes. As for sexual abuse, realize that sex abuse cases also abound in the Orthodox clergy.

I think Isaac was talking about Latinizations and such.

I was Byzantine Catholic for many years in a highly latinized parish even when Rome has called the Eastern Catholics to revert back to their ecclesiastical heritage.

It does take time to revert to their traditions. After all, Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox who pay lip service to Rome. They are heirs of John Beccus of Constantinople, Saint Josaphat and many other Saints who advocated union with Rome for centuries. They are heirs to tradition of the East predating Schism as well, and all that stems from it.

Also, a “rite” is so much more than a nice Liturgy with chanting and incense

Now an obligatory disclaimer; I agree with this and would never argue against it. I just want to point out that pre-schism nobody was like “eh but that’s Alexandrian tradition we don’t really care, they can formulate their own theology”, nor anything like that between Greeks and Latin. Rite should retain it’s identity but separating it from others is not as good- they should be taken as part of something bigger together.

 

[Gab123]

I was speaking to abuses of Eastern Catholics in the USA by Latin churchmen.

Thanks for clarifying. As for churchmen, there will always be the bad ones regardless of Rite

 

[dvdjs]

Unfortunately, my opinion has not changed. If it happens, it will purely be political and no real deep, theological discussion. The Patriarchs and the Pope of Rome will get together occasionally to show a sign of “unity” but Latins will be Latins, Greeks will be Greeks and all will go about their daily business.

What si the value of a deep theological discussion?
What is the value of a deep discussion of ecclesiology?
What is the valuer of harping on matters on which, arguably, the saving of no soul depends?

There is value in working together on social and humanitarian issues.
There is IMO, a profound value of allowing reception of sacraments especially confession and communion. It is a disgrace that is held hostage to affiliation.

 

[ziapueblo]

Rite should retain it’s identity but separating it from others is not as good- they should be taken as part of something bigger together.

I know you do not think this way but many see “as part of something bigger” to mean the Roman Catholic Church. I know I did for such a long time.

ZP

 

[ziapueblo]

I agree to some extent. It would be nice if the Churches opened up communion for one another and hash out the theological stuff over time.

ZP

 

[ziapueblo]

Jesus gave authority to Peter.

Do you mean to say universal and immediate jurisdiction over the whole Church?

ZP

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I know you do not think this way but many see “as part of something bigger” to mean the Roman Catholic Church. I know I did for such a long time.

I would apply my statement to any and every rite. Including Latin Rite. It is also part of something bigger. Error of subordinatism among rites is an error; something already declared by Church not to be true.

There is value in working together on social and humanitarian issues.

In my country this is a reality. I am very happy for that.

There is IMO, a profound value of allowing reception of sacraments especially confession and communion.

According to Orthodox as well as Catholic Bishops and theologians, shared communion should be last step in unity of the Churches, not first. It is a consequence of being united, not what leads to it. Catholic Church allows communion of Orthodox Christians in their services under some circumstances which prevent above error (namely, where danger of indiferentism is not present).

 

[Gab123]

Do you mean to say universal and immediate jurisdiction over the whole Church?

Obviously bishops would have local authority over their local flocks, but all in union with the Vicar of Christ

 

[Gab123]

It would be nice if the Churches opened up communion for one another

This is what I hope to see in my lifetime.

 

[dvdjs]

I agree to some extent. It would be nice if the Churches opened up communion for one another and hash out the theological stuff over time.

I like this idea. And only once they are at ease with some diversity in theology should they even mention ecclesiology. Or maybe they should just not mention it at all.

In my country this is a reality. I am very happy for that.

IIRC you are in Slovakia. how much collaboration is there between Greek Catholics and Orthodox there?

According to Orthodox as well as Catholic Bishops and theologians, shared communion should be last step in unity of the Churches, not first.

According to Orthodox that is true. Officially. At some times. And in some places. IOW true except when it isn’t.

But the Catholic church already welcomes Orthodox to communion. Catholics are advised to avoid indifferentism, when approaching other Churches, but Orthodox are welcome to commune.

It is a consequence of being united, not what leads to it.

It is a consequence of a lack of love and a skewed perspective on what we need to be united about.

It is ridiculous that a declaration of affiliation - and really nothing else - is all that is genuinely required for a Greek Catholic to be communed in an Orthodox church. And a person were just visiting for example on travel, often not even that. What that state of affairs indicates is that “being unified”, as you put it, is a matter of head count, not faith. That is awful.