Orthodox bishop shares Communion with Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chaldean_Rite
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Valentin said:
orthodox church exists only in Greece
Click to expand...
That statement is either painfully ignorant or horribly naive. šŸ˜¦

It has nothing to do with hating Catholics or anyone else for that matter. Catholics rightly get up in arms when a rogue bishop ordains a women. Does that mean that Catholics hate women? Of course it doesnā€™t, it means that bishop did something that is clearly contrary to the Churchā€™s teaching and therefore he should be censured. It has nothing to do with hate and everything to do with preserving the faith. It is the same thing with this Orthodox bishop. He has done something that is clearly contrary to the teachings of the Church and because of that he must be held accountable both for the sake of the Church and for the sake of his own salvation.

Itā€™s all about the integrity of the faithā€¦surely you can appreciate that?

Yours in Christ
Joe
 
saying that about Orthodox church, that it exists only in Greece, I meant the following :
  • Greece was the only free from communism country and the normal church life went on in these years
  • in the rest - Bulgaria, Roumania, Russia, Ukraine and so on, the communistic regime surpressed the church, sent many of them to the prison, killed many of them, destroyed the church buldings, forbade the people to wear neck crosses
  • that is why the normal church life were stopped 50 years ago
  • now the liturgies are mainly visited by very old people, if any young are there, most of them do not really understand what is going on
  • the church life is in very low level, that people are looking for any services just because they have any unexplainable feeling of need of any supernatural creature to help them for health and good lifeā€¦
that was all what i meantā€¦
 
Thatā€™s the problem, a shared Eucharist is the last step in reconciliation not a way of promoting it. Encouraging inter-communion would be tantamount to advising a man and a women to start having pre-marital sex as a step toward their eventual marriage.
Click to expand...
you make a valid point. i donā€™t have a problem with orthodox christians recieving the eucharist in catholic churches only because i see in the orthodox the apostolic faith of the fathers. but then again, in that faith i see the primacy of rome.

for better or worse, the catholic church after VII decided to approach ecumenism with a inclusive mentality.
 
Valentin said:
saying that about Orthodox church, that it exists only in Greece, I meant the following :
  • Greece was the only free from communism country and the normal church life went on in these years
  • in the rest - Bulgaria, Roumania, Russia, Ukraine and so on, the communistic regime surpressed the church, sent many of them to the prison, killed many of them, destroyed the church buldings, forbade the people to wear neck crosses
  • that is why the normal church life were stopped 50 years ago
  • now the liturgies are mainly visited by very old people, if any young are there, most of them do not really understand what is going on
  • the church life is in very low level, that people are looking for any services just because they have any unexplainable feeling of need of any supernatural creature to help them for health and good lifeā€¦
that was all what i meantā€¦
Click to expand...
I apologize if I sounded harsh but there is a perception in some circles in America that the Greek Orthodox in this country can be somewhat arrogant, the attitude that one must be Greek to be truly Orthodox is one that is often perceived from them. In fact some blame the attitude of the Greeks in general for the failure to achieve full jurisdictional unification in America.

As to your point about the repression of the Church I can see your point to a certain extent. Although the Greeks spent centuries under the foot of the Ottoman Turks and the Church eventually arose stronger than ever.

Yours in Christ
Joe
 
So yes, they may reject the Catholic faith as a whole because of disagreements with some doctrines as long as their doctrine relating to the eucharist is the same and that their succession of bishops are valid, which it is and have been affirmed by Rome and they can still receive Communion.

This issue is not of denying Papal supremacy or denying the Immaculate conception.
Click to expand...
Here, you reveal clearly what you believe. I appreciate your honesty.

Youā€™ve said clearly that humanity does not have to accept all of Catholic doctrine, no matter that it has been solemnly defined as binding on all Christians.

Youā€™ve stated clearly that we are free to reject those doctrines of the Church with which we disagree, and to receive Holy Communion with impunity.

I disagree profoundly.

What youā€™ve presented is the only logical conclusion of someone who supports ā€œopen Communionā€ with the Orthodox. The only intellectually consistent position is to say that the Orthodox do not have to accept the doctrines of the Church - that they are in communion with the Church even while rejecting what it has dogmatically defined.

Anyone who believes such a thing does not hold the Catholic faith.
 
josephdaniel29 said:
I have a question. How long has the canon been in effect that states Orthodox sacraments are valid but illicit? I ask this because it seems to me traditionalist Catholics seem to be less inclined to allow Orthodox to commune than others.

Yours in Christ
Joe
Click to expand...
Traditionalist Catholics accept that the Eucharist confected by Orthodox priests is valid.

We do not believe, however, that this has any bearing whatsoever on whether they should be permitted to receive Holy Communion in a Catholic Church. Assent to an identical apostolic faith is the measure of communion, not the validity of a Sacrament.
 
josephdaniel29 said:
Thatā€™s the problem, a shared Eucharist is the last step in reconciliation not a way of promoting it. Encouraging inter-communion would be tantamount to advising a man and a women to start having pre-marital sex as a step toward their eventual marriage.

The bottom line is inter-communion isnā€™t for the good of the Orthodox or the Catholics as it only lends itself to confusion about what is and what isnā€™t true. Our only only hope is the pure unadulterated Apostolic Faith, only after there is agreement in doctrine can there be a shared Eucharist.

Yours in Christ
Joe
Click to expand...
Actually, this is not quite accurate. The analogy would be better described as a husband and wife who have been separated. While they disagree on some aspects of their relationship, the relationship is still valid. The coming together in Holy Communion may be valid, as a married but separated couple coming together in marital union is valid. However, this may cause scandal or confusion to the children. As this thread can attest, many are confused about what this means for the unity of the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

So the main issue here, as I see it, is that while this Orthodox bishop may have validly received communion, it has caused great confusion and fighting among the children of both Churches. And that does nothing for unity.
 
Moderator Note:
While it is acceptable to question policies and practices of any church, it is also important to stay on the topic of the forum you are posting in. The focus of the Eastern Catholicism forum is to provide a community for Eastern Catholics and to help Latin Catholics better appreciate the Churchā€™s Eastern heritage.

A comment on the prudence of Roman Catholic canon law allowing Orthodox to receive generated enough off-topic posts to create a new thread from them in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum. Please see here to continue that discussion. This thread will continue to discuss the Orthodox bishopā€™s reception of communion in an Eastern Catholic church.
 
Yes, I was expecting this to happen after what he did: cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=59019

Romanian Orthodox Prelate Threatened with Excommunication For Sharing Communion

Bucharest, Jun. 11, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The Orthodox prelate who shared Communion with Catholics at an Eastern-rite liturgical service in May now could face excommunication from the Romanian Orthodox Church.

Orthodox Metropolitan Nicolae Corneanu of Banat joined Romanian Catholic Bishop Alexandru Mesian of Lugoj at the altar on May 25, sharing the Eucharist with the Catholic prelate. His action outraged some Orthodox believers, and the Romanian Orthodox synod announced that Metropolitan Corneanu ā€œmay be asked to give an appropriate explanationā€ at a synod meeting in July.

More news on the link provided.
 
josephdaniel29 said:
I apologize if I sounded harsh but there is a perception in some circles in America that the Greek Orthodox in this country can be somewhat arrogant, the attitude that one must be Greek to be truly Orthodox is one that is often perceived from them. In fact some blame the attitude of the Greeks in general for the failure to achieve full jurisdictional unification in America.

As to your point about the repression of the Church I can see your point to a certain extent. Although the Greeks spent centuries under the foot of the Ottoman Turks and the Church eventually arose stronger than ever.

Yours in Christ
Joe
Click to expand...
Better you read the history. In Ottoman times the Greek church had special rights and had oppressed the rest of the orthodox churches. We, in Bulgaria, being 500 in Ottoman empire, sometimes think - what was worse - Turkish political oppression or Greek spiritual oppression.
 
eddy1 said:
Can you explain the following? First, the Prelate (in the photo) is holding a white cloth as he consumes: usually, in my experience, he would be holding a red one, with white ones being used for cleaning the Chalice after Everything has been consumed.
Click to expand...
The use of a white cloth - a Latinization - is still common in some Greek Catholic circlesā€¦
eddy1 said:
Second, he is not wearing even an Epitrahil. A Priest who has been in the nave would put an Epitrahil on when he enters the Altar to commune: why would a Bishop not do the same? thanks.
Click to expand...
It could be the case that he had not planned to commune when he went to the dedicationā€¦

Just speculation.
 
A question which causes me some concern:

If this bishop were to join the Catholic communion, would the Pope allow him to take his flock with him if they want to do so? I am afraid that this courageous bishop (if it was a statement of his desire to become Catholic, it was courageous indeed; besides that, I am also referring to his desire to cede the churches stolen from the Romanian Catholics back to the Catholic Church) might be left to hang.

Currently, I am thinking about the Popeā€™s refusal to permit the Macedonian Orthodox to come into Catholic communion. Would that policy apply here (of course, on the theory that he wants to come into Catholic communion)?

I am also of a mind that there would be an inconsistency between permitting communion with the Assyrian Church, and denying it to the Macedonian Orthodox.

What is the situation with the Macedonian Orthodox currently, BTW?

Blessings,
Marduk
 
mardukm said:
Currently, I am thinking about the Popeā€™s refusal to permit the Macedonian Orthodox to come into Catholic communion.
Click to expand...
:confused:

Are you saying there are Orthodox persons who have expressed a desire to convert to Catholicism and been refused by the Pope?
 
Peter_J said:
:confused:

Are you saying there are Orthodox persons who have expressed a desire to convert to Catholicism and been refused by the Pope?
Click to expand...
The Macedonian Orthodox church put out feelers to that effect some time in the late 1990ā€™s, I believe, but were rebuffed by Pope John Paul II.

That does not necessarily mean that they were ā€œconvertingā€ in the sense of adopting Latin theology or accepting Vatican I. Otherwise I should think they would be proclaiming those today even without intercommunion, because they were convinced of it.

I believe, although I am not certain of this, that in the judgment of Pope JP II the move would have been seen as a return of the policy of U****ism, which would essentially be exploiting problems in the Orthodox community.

I donā€™t know if the Macedonian proposal had conditions attached, that is another possible reason for rejecting the idea. It could also even been political posturing on their part, a device to apply leverage on the EP.

At Balomond the practice of accepting partial Orthodox communities had been rejected. The focus is to be on reuniting with the entire Orthodox community, not to take advantage of occasional opportunies to split it up. I think the idea here is to build up an atmosphere of trust and facilitate dialogue.
 
Thanks, Hesychios, that does make it clearer.
Hesychios said:
At Balomond the practice of accepting partial Orthodox communities had been rejected.
Click to expand...
You mean in the joint statement "Uniatism, method of union of the past, and the present search for full communion" ?
 
All joking aside, can we all try to get together on the issue of these u-words?

ā€œUniateā€ (or ā€œuniatā€) is an offensive term and should be avoided.

ā€œUniatismā€ is a perfectly appropriate term to use to polite company. (Of course, the practice of uniatism is something that ought to be avoided, as the document ā€œUniatism, method of union of the past, and the present search for full communionā€ tells us.)
 
Hesychios,

I believe there is a Macedonian Orthodox Church in Burr Ridge. Have you ever been there? Are they an autocephalous Church with their own Metropolitan or Patriarch? It is my understanding that they are a very small Church.
 
Can someone comment on my impression that it was inconsistent to refuse communion to the Macedonian Orthodox, while granting communion to the Assyrians? What was the difference in the situations?

Thanks.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Marduk,
mardukm said:
Can someone comment on my impression that it was inconsistent to refuse communion to the Macedonian Orthodox, while granting communion to the Assyrians? What was the difference in the situations?

Thanks.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
In order to answer that, Iā€™d have to know more about the Macedonian efforts and the response from JPII. Is there an online article you could link?

Itā€™s possible that the popes have been inconsistent with respect to the two occasions, but I donā€™t see any proof of that in what has been said here so far.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top