On Being in Communion with Rome

[Alexander_Roman]

You are a true Brother in Christ!

May the Lord bless you for your understanding and perspicaciousness!



Alex

 

[hazcompat]

ciero:
We will see if you feel the same way after being an Eastern Catholic for a year or 2… Most folks change their tune.

BEWARE of the tuners. be aware of the fire of the Holy Spirit in your heart.

peace

 

[hazcompat]

Ones motives might be heuristic.

peace

 

[Andrew_Joseph]

I was raised without religion, and after much searching came to embrace the truth of the sacramental church and was illicitly confirmed by a traditional Old Roman Catholic priest. After I while I came to understand and appreciate the importance of being in communion with the See of Peter, but had (and still do have) many reservations about the Novus Ordo. When I learned of the Byzantine Rite and saw the profound respect for the Eucharist shown in the Eastern Catholic churches, I immediately knew I was home.

 

[Frankk]

It seems Rome talks a good talk, but still has yet to learn that “Roman Catholic” is not the one and ONLY Catholic church.

Whatever makes you think it sees itself as the ‘one and only’?

The autonomous Catholic Churches in full communion with the Holy See are:

Of Alexandrian liturgical tradition:
Coptic Catholic Church
Ethiopic Catholic Church

Of Antiochian liturgical tradition:
Maronite Church
Syrian Catholic Church
Syro-Malankara Catholic Church

Of Armenian liturgical tradition:
Armenian Catholic Church

Of Byzantine (Constantinopolitan) liturgical tradition:
Albanian Byzantine Catholic Church
Belarusian Greek Catholic Church
Bulgarian Greek Catholic Church
Byzantine Church of the Eparchy of Križevci
Greek Byzantine Catholic Church
Hungarian Greek Catholic Church
Italo-Albanian Catholic Church
Macedonian Greek Catholic Church
Melkite Greek Catholic Church
Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic
Russian Byzantine Catholic Church
Ruthenian Catholic Church
Slovak Greek Catholic Church
Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church

Of Chaldean or East Syrian tradition:
Chaldean Catholic Church
Syro-Malabar Church

Of Western liturgical tradition:
Latin Church

Quite a list for a Church that sees itself as the one and only!?

In addition the Catholic Church sees itself as in partial, not full communion, with other Christian groups. The CCC (838) states:

“With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist”

 

[Frankk]

After I while I came to understand and appreciate the importance of being in communion with the See of Peter, but had (and still do have) many reservations about the Novus Ordo.

I can recommend two books to you:

“The Shape of the Liturgy” by Dom Gregory Dix (an Anglican monk but also a liturgist of renown) and

“The Mass of the Roman Rite” by Joseph Jungmann SJ

Both books will demonstrate how much closer to the Masses of the Early Church the Novus Ordo is compared to the Tridentine Rite.

It’s an interesting question why the Church would need a Canon Law requiring Catholics to receive Communion at least once a year?? It is because for centuries people (laity) never took Communion at all. Similarly Pius X lowered the age for First Communion to seven to, amongst other things, encourage more people to take Communion more frequently.

The Novena of First Fridays was also a means to encourage more frequent reception. We have certainly improved since VII and the Novus Ordo arrived.

 

[Andrew_Joseph]

I can recommend two books to you:

“The Shape of the Liturgy” by Dom Gregory Dix (an Anglican monk but also a liturgist of renown) and

“The Mass of the Roman Rite” by Joseph Jungmann SJ

Both books will demonstrate how much closer to the Masses of the Early Church the Novus Ordo is compared to the Tridentine Rite.

It’s an interesting question why the Church would need a Canon Law requiring Catholics to receive Communion at least once a year?? It is because for centuries people (laity) never took Communion at all. Similarly Pius X lowered the age for First Communion to seven to, amongst other things, encourage more people to take Communion more frequently.

The Novena of First Fridays was also a means to encourage more frequent reception. We have certainly improved since VII and the Novus Ordo arrived.

My concern is not so much with the form of the Novus Ordo as with the total lack of respect for the Eucharist in so many churches. The TLM is at least always celebrated without the clown costumes and other liturgical abuses made possible by the Novus Ordo.

The reverence shown in the Byzantine Rite was the main reason for me becoming Eastern Catholic, not any sense of concern regarding the validity or lack thereof of the Novus Ordo.

 

[ConstantineTG]

My concern is not so much with the form of the Novus Ordo as with the total lack of respect for the Eucharist in so many churches.

This has nothing to do with the Pauline Mass. The Mass itself cannot instill reverence on those who have none, no matter the form of Mass. And if one is reverent, then no matter what the form of Mass, he/she will exude reverence.

The TLM is at least always celebrated without the clown costumes and other liturgical abuses made possible by the Novus Ordo.

And the TLM is not protected from abuse either. Today it just seems that way because only a fraction of Roman Masses are in the Tridentine form, and those who would use it are careful enough to ensure faithful adherence to rubrics. Give it to more people and you’ll find the same abuses.

Wait, this is the EC forum. If I want more of these trad talk, I’d go to the Traditionalist Forum.

The reverence shown in the Byzantine Rite was the main reason for me becoming Eastern Catholic, not any sense of concern regarding the validity or lack thereof of the Novus Ordo.

Again this is contentious. Of course it doesn’t sound as bad when you call these abuses as “Latinizations”. But aren’t the abuses in the RC just “Protestantization”?

 

[PodunkMommy]

Ok, I am not an Eastern Catholic but am Roman Catholic by birth. I fell away from the faith and as I was being re-converted and my husband was coming into the faith from his Methodist background, I found myself falling in love with the Byzantine Rite.

I worked at a little religious bookstore that sold both Catholic and Orthodox books and gifts. We would get people, both laity and religious from both coming into the store all the time. It was great to be able to talk to them and hear both perspectives.

After learning as much as my brain could handle at that point in time I wanted to be Eastern. Spiritually I felt that was who I was. I was pregnant and I wanted to bring my children up in the Eastern Rite of the Church. It is what I believed.

I had questions on certain things to do with the schism but what I couldn’t imagine was not having a Pope. I guess I think a hiearachy, just as in a family, is very important, so I would have chosen to convert to Byzantine Catholic.

All of this doesn’t matter now because my husband, coming from a Protestant background did not want me to become Byzantine Catholic.

14 years later, here we are and I feel like our kids are stuck in the middle of two worlds of faith. We go to a Roman Catholic Church but most of the parishioners don’t even know about the Eastern side of the Church.

I know, I got way off track there. Sorry.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Why doesn’t your husband want to become Eastern? I thought my wife would object to switching parishes but when I asked her, she said yes without hesitation. So in a blink of an eye, we were practicing Ukrainian Catholics.

 

[JohnVIII]

I don’t know why I’m still reading threads about communion with Rome! I’ve already gone too far in the “dogma” of this matter because the stress of it really gets to me. But…

Personally, I sometimes get so frustrated that I am tempted to go Orthodox.

I’ve already reverted back to Orthodoxy. For me it is alot less stressful.

OF COURSE the Catholic Church is “fuller in the faith” than the Orthodox! Don’t you know that the Orthodox affirm that we have ADDED to the Faith? By the infallible laws of logic and mathematics, we MUST have more of it than THEY do!

All kidding aside…I would say that the Orthodox not in communion with Rome have all the Faith EXCEPT -------- communion with Rome.

Blessings,
Marduk

Brother Marduk, if you were pope & teach the same as pope I would never reverted back to Orthodoxy!

I could be comfortable in being in communion with Rome if it were 1000 years ago, but I doubt that even the early Eastern Churches would have been in communion with Rome if the Rome of the first 1000 years was like the Rome of today. Although many early fathers spoke very “dogmatically” about unity with Rome, many of these same fathers separated from Rome at one point or another. And not all the early fathers agreed either; St Cyprian said that even Rome could separate from Catholic unity, and St Firmilian said the pope did separate from Catholic unity.

I joined communion with Rome two times, and it is possible there may be a third time (as I have discovered a 4th Eastern Catholic Church in my area that might not be so Latinized as the other 3 are). But I just can’t be dogmatic about this issue, and unless I can feel that it is ethical for me to believe in the primacy of the pope in a different way than the dogmatic way that Vatican I seems to say that it must be accepted, then my “Orthodox” conscience just will not let me go there.

At this point, I believe that Rome has gone far enough away from its calling to be the center of Catholic unity that it is at least optional to be in communion with Her. I believe that not being in communion with Rome is fully justifiable. I also believe that it is not impossible for Rome to go into heresy, and if She did, communion with Her would be wrong. I believe that Rome, after a careful study of her teachings, is not technically in heresy (the Eastern Churches have made an error in concluding this). But, She comes so very close in some areas I would not condemn anyone who thinks Rome has crossed the line.

I don’t wish to judge Rome, and I really don’t wish to not be in communion with Her either, but I have to say that I feel far more stable and sane and really “at home” in Holy Orthodoxy. Within Orthodoxy, “Rome”, for me, is Moscow; even though I am Antiochian Orthodox. (Hello there brother [user]Montalo[/user]!) I was in ROCOR for about 20 years, before they joined communion with the schismatic Moscow Patriarchate. - Sorry! I suppose many Catholics may not understand how I can call Moscow “Rome” and also say that She is in schism all in the same paragraph. An explanation would be long and not directly applicable to this thread. - But I still believe that compete union between Rome and Russia will happen, and it will follow the same pattern that the union between Moscow and ROCOR happened! Nuf said.

 

[PodunkMommy]

Why doesn’t your husband want to become Eastern? I thought my wife would object to switching parishes but when I asked her, she said yes without hesitation. So in a blink of an eye, we were practicing Ukrainian Catholics.

I think my husband doesn’t feel comfortable coming from a non-Church background and the Church that he did have was very Protestant.

It doesn’t matter anyway because we are out in the boondocks and are lucky to have a Catholic Church close by. There are no orthodox Catholic Churches if you know what I mean (at least in my eyes) and no Eastern Catholic Churches, and no Orthodox Churches either.

We used to have to drive about 1/2 hour to Mass and I finally convinced my hubby to start us going to a Church that happens to be very close, it’s a Mission Church. They don’t do much but because they are under a main Church that was trying to shut them down. Long story but I like them because they feel like something out of the 1800’s.

I guess I don’t feel comfortable with anything in this century. I mean it’s a Novus Ordo Mass, but the Church itself is Mission Style and I feel like I’m back in time.

When the kids visit their spiritual “Grandma” they go to her Eastern Catholic Church.