Is West more embracing of East, or vice-versa?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

catholic1seeks

Guest
Is West or East Christianity more embracing of the other? As a Catholic, I have my own opinion, but I’d like to know yours and the reasons for it. So please comment after you vote.

This poll is talking about Christian Western and Eastern theological, liturgical, and spiritual approaches and traditions — not various philosophies and practices that stem from the Enlightenment, or politics, or materialism, and so on. Think CHURCH.

About “embracing” —> As in, is Western Christianity more comfortable with including elements from the East in its practice and understanding of the Faith? Or is the East more comfortable with accepting elements from the West? Is West or East more holistic?
  • Western Christianity is more embracing of Eastern theology, liturgy, and spirituality
  • Eastern Christianity is more embracing of Western theology, liturgy, and spirituality
0 voters
 
Last edited:
Undoubtedly the Catholic Church largely behaves in a more ecumenical way than the Eastern Orthodox Church.

But it’s always easy to be more gracious when you’re the one who’s largely “won” history, as the rise of militant Islam severely curtailed the success of all forms of Orthodoxy.
 
We all worship the same god right? I mean does it really matter how you worship?
 
In any case, it seems to me that the spirit of competition in religion is a very positive phenomenon.
Sometimes it is useful to learn from each other.
 
Greetings,

I feel that the Latin Church may seem to embrace Eastern Christianity more so than the east embracing the west.

For example, when reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church the eastern fathers such as Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Basil the Great and Saint Gregory the Theologian are referenced just as often as, let’s say, Saint Jerome or Saint Augustine. There have also been papal encyclicals written on the eastern churches calling on them to revive their ancient heritage. As I made my journey east (Byzantine Catholic), I did not notice Orthodox books referencing the Latin fathers (granted, I did not read many so I could be wrong). However, if you have a chance to read the Orthodox Study Bible, Saint Ambrose of Milan is often sited/quoted in the foot notes.

That being said, I believe that the east could argue that the west has not embraced the east as far as the Latinization of eastern churches from the past to make them seem “Catholic.” Also, many Roman Catholics are not up to speed on the eastern churches and being Catholic is synonymous with Roman Catholic.

My two cents.

ZP
 
I would say that TODAY, the West accepts the East more. However, in the past, both East and West had equal friction.
 
The problem with the “East” is that there are many eastern churches.

For example, obviously, the establishment in the Russian Church has been lately unaccepting to the point of violence.

However, there are so many eastern churches and some are so small. Russia, especially the Russia of the last hundred years. cannot be representative.
 
GodSoughtMe said:
Russia, especially the Russia of the last hundred years. cannot be representative.
Click to expand...
Were it not for the Russian church, I have no serious doubts that their Holinesses Benedict and Bartholomew could have brought most of the three dozen or so churches back into communion 😦

hawk
 
Two ships passing in the night. I would say they generally embrace their own idea/projection of the other, and love or hate it accordingly.
 
I’d say the first, Western more embracing.

I’ve heard complaints about “latinizations” coming from the east- but never the opposite “greekisms” from the west.

Even though both cultures are definitely exchanging ideas as people move back and forth across the meridian, bringing their own ideas of spirituality.

On the same point, because the west is so much huger than the east is, I can certainly understand their point of view, too much embracing and they run the risk of extinction especially places like the United States. Such a small minority can get swallowed up pretty quickly.
 
In fact, many of the latinizations in the US were meant to suppress the Eastern practices 😦

hawk
 
dochawk said:
In fact, many of the latinizations in the US were meant to suppress the Eastern practices
Click to expand...
You really think so? The way I looked at it was a bit different. I saw it as cross-pollination, so many of our Greek Catholic friends got married to Latin Rite people, attended Latin rite schools from 1st grade up through the university level, attended CYO and other programs in the neighborhood at the local Latin rite churches, things rub off on people, no? I just don’t see proof that there was a nefarious motive here.
 
Some were self imposed.

Others were ordered by latin ordinaries (the extreme case being to use the Roman liturgy instead of their own!)

In the early 20th century, there was a quite concerted effort by RC bishops to stamp out Eastern Catholicism in the US. One particularly pig-headed bishop directly caused two schisms all on his own!

hawk
 
dochawk said:
In the early 20th century, there was a quite concerted effort by RC bishops to stamp out Eastern Catholicism in the US. One particularly pig-headed bishop directly caused two schisms all on his own!
Click to expand...
Of course, your referring to Archbishop Ireland who died 100 years ago this year. In partial defense of Ireland and his contemporaries, the Church was growing by leaps and bounds during that period as millions of immigrants came over in a short time, from a score of different countries, and I’m sure it was quite a task with all of the church building, school building, social services, etc., all across so many different cultures.

Mistakes were definitely made, but I don’t think a flawless execution of that kind of situation was possible.
 
Augustinian said:
Mistakes were definitely made, but I don’t think a flawless execution of that kind of situation was possible.
Click to expand...
“You are not a priest.”

“Yes, sir, I am; here are my credentials from my bishop.”

“He is not a priest, either.”

That exchange, with the bishop whose name I will not repeat, is beyond “mistake.” (and, as his other schism shows, it wasn’t a one-time thing with him, either!)

hawk
 
dochawk said:
That exchange, with the bishop whose name I will not repeat, is beyond “mistake.”
Click to expand...
The bishop in question died 100 years ago this year, although you might not understand why he did what he did, it water that’s long passed under the bridge.
 
Augustinian said:
The bishop in question died 100 years ago this year, although you might not understand why he did what he did, it water that’s long passed under the bridge.
Click to expand...
Oh, I quite understand.

Time doesn’t mean that he wasn’t wrong, uncharitable, and a bigot.

It also doesn’t put the two halves of my church that his hate split back in communion . . .

hawk
 
Last edited:
JRS_831 said:
Sickening to see a Bishop Ireland apologist on this Forum
Click to expand...
I think that many Eastern Christians have a chip on their shoulder about Bishop Ireland, and that is not without some justification. However, historical accuracy is important.

Bishop Ireland died in 1918, long before the Chornock schism.

The only narratives that we have about the encounter of Bishop Ireland and Fr.Toth whose objectivity is reasonably questioned. The idea that that the schism was triggered by Bishop Ireland, while true at some level, overlooks the fact that Fr. Toth’s “missionary” efforts among Greek Catholic clergy, who would be most affected by Bishop Ireland’s ostensible obstinacy were a total failure; he met with some success at the level of laity, whose interest in celibacy was far less than their interest in the ownership of parish assets - and issue that has nothing to do with Bishop Ireland.

As far as latinization goes, that was rarely, if ever, a matter of cross-pollination at the parishioner level, but deliberate decisions of hierarchs and priests - mostly from within rather than imposed from without.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top