Orthodox catholics

[ByzCathCantor]

Haven’t you read it yourself? You do support our Church don’t you?

I have, and I do despite your repeated suggestions here to the contrary. I will ask this one time only for you to refrain from the ad hominem, direct or via the thinly veiled innuendo that has permeated this discussion throughout.

People of good faith here generally adhere to academic standards with citations. If you claim the CCC says something, then quote it. No one here can rightfully be expected to know what you might be referring to, and in what context.

 

[TEPO]

Well, yes. The Orthodox consider themselves to be the Catholic Church. If you mean it in that sense, then I guess it is true to say that “Catholic communion is only for Catholics”. But I mean Catholic as *“in communion with Rome”, i.e. us (Latin Catholics and Eastern Catholics).

*Then again, according to the Anglicans, Catholics and Orthodox are both "Catholic"and so are Anglicans.

Yes, we’re all part of the one Church, however we’re not all in communion. There are exceptions that have been made in certain circumstances. But as Catholics were required to have faith that what is being done is through the will of God. Catholics must believe this.

 

[TEPO]

I have, and I do despite your repeated suggestions here to the contrary. I will ask this one time only for you to refrain from the ad hominem, direct or via the thinly veiled innuendo that has permeated this discussion throughout.

People of good faith here generally adhere to academic standards with citations. If you claim the CCC says something, then quote it. No one here can rightfully be expected to know what you might be referring to, and in what context.

If you have an issue with a Church teaching, and I tell you it’s in the CCC, then you should have the desire to find it for yourself if you’re sincerely wanting the answer. If you don’t believe that it’s there, then tell me now and then I’ll go look for it myself.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

If you have an issue with a Church teaching, and I tell you it’s in the CCC, then you should have the desire to find it for yourself if you’re sincerely wanting the answer. If you don’t believe that it’s there, then tell me now and then I’ll go look for it myself.

I have no issue with Church teaching and wish it to be faithfully explained by Catholics here. That is what actually started this now long, drawn-out debate. Frankly, Catholic teaching was being misrepresented, and it appears that is still the case to a lesser extent here.

Since you have no desire to put your reference of the CCC in context with a citation, there is no point whatsoever in continuing discussion on the point as there was in fact none. This is none other than a series of usages of the term “Catholic” in varied contexts, literally from one post to the next, as convenience suits.

 

[TEPO]

I have no issue with Church teaching and wish it to be faithfully explained by Catholics here. That is what actually started this now long, drawn-out debate. Frankly, Catholic teaching was being misrepresented, and it appears that is still the case to a lesser extent here.

Since you have no desire to put your reference of the CCC in context with a citation, there is no point whatsoever in continuing discussion on the point as there was in fact none. This is none other than a series of usages of the term “Catholic” in varied contexts, literally from one post to the next, as convenience suits.

Let me get this straight… You want to know what the word Catholic means, and you want the CCC’s definition, is this right…? sorry, but you can do that for yourself.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Let me get this straight…

That would be preferable

 

[TEPO]

That would be preferable

Show me where I’m wrong then… If you have nothing to add or correct then why keep posting?

 

[TEPO]

I find it strange how so much negativity comes forth when the discussion becomes more about Catholicism… But when Orthodoxy is the topic then everything seems to be in good standing.

Something’s wrong here.

 

[lssanjose]

TEPO, I say this with all my heart, and love for you, but… For a man who’s supposedly a husband, and father of four, I’m not given any indication of such, based on what you’ve been posting, herein. Your tone, throughout these many pages, only indicates (from my POV) one of your kids hijacked your computer, to spout off unfounded accusations against our Orthodox brethren.

In the Eastern tradition, it is said about the Holy Spirit: Heavenly King, Comforter, Spirit of Truth, Treasury of Blessings, Filling All things, EVERYWHERE present. I’m almost done with the late Rev Casimir Kucharek’s book on Byzantine Catechism, for adults (circa 1967) who said there was a false interpretation surriounding the phrase about Christ’s church, saying, “salvation” isn’t exclusive to any one church, even the Catholic Church (notice the proper denotation).

 

[Vico]

CCC 816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267

The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God."268

** Wounds to unity **

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ’s Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

 

[TEPO]

CCC 816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267

The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God."268

** Wounds to unity **

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ’s Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

This is a good post.

 

[ConstantineTG]

that the Catholic Eucharist is superior to the Orthodox one (in my opinion)

How so? Isn’t the Eucharist the Body and Blood of Christ? Can Christ be measured in varying degrees? Is there such a thing as “more Jesus” and “less Jesus”? If the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ, and Christ is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, how can the Eucharist of the Catholics be superior to the Eucharist of the Orthodox?

 

[TEPO]

How so? Isn’t the Eucharist the Body and Blood of Christ? Can Christ be measured in varying degrees? Is there such a thing as “more Jesus” and “less Jesus”? If the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ, and Christ is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, how can the Eucharist of the Catholics be superior to the Eucharist of the Orthodox?

Catholics should always seek the Eucharist at a Catholic Mass. ALL Catholics must believe this. That is unless it is a very very rare circumstance.

 

[TEPO]

@Constantine:

Eucharist has a few meanings:

Greek eucharistia, gratitude.

The Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, which is called thanksgiving (Eucharist) because Christ “gave thanks,” at the Mystical Supper by it, so it is the supreme object and act of Christian gratitude.

The Eucharist is also The Eucharistic synaxis, because the Eucharist is celebrated amid the assembly of the faithful, which is the visible expression of the Church. If those faithful are not joined in the fullness of the faith of the visible Church (united with the Pope of Rome) then the Eucharistic synaxis is lacking as a visible expression of the Church.

Here’s a good explanation as to why.

 

[Peter_J]

Catholics should always seek the Eucharist at a Catholic Mass. ALL Catholics must believe this. That is unless it is a very very rare circumstance.

Catholics? And yet, you rejected the use of “Catholics” to mean “Christians in full communion with Rome” rather than answer my question, namely:

Interesting. Does the same reasoning work the other way? That is to say, if tomorrow Rome decided that Catholic communion is only for Catholics, does it follow that our consecrations would not be blessed with the Spirit of unity through “one body one Spirit” in Christ?

 

[Peter_J]

Other possibilities (and it is unreasonable to assume that one is free from all of these passions and being “merely disobedient” (which is the worst sin of all, really. It’s the sin that guided Lucifer) so feel free to examine yourself and realize which of these apply to your motives)

1. Pride: “I believe I have a right to their communion whether or not they say I do” “I will receive if I want to.” “My church says I can and so even as a guest in other’s home I will do as I see fit.” “I am Roman Catholic and thus I can do as I see fit.”
2. Being uncharitable: “I am here as a guest but I will do what is gravely insulting from their point of view because I don’t care about their point of view.” “I’ve been asked not to do something, but I will do it anyway because I want to.”
3. Sloth: “There are proper channels to request this sort of thing but I’m too lazy to seek them out.”
4. Lack of Humility: “I know better than the Spiritual Fathers, Bishops, Saints and laity of the Orthodox Church.” “Rather than follow a course which will teach me humility I will do what will make me stand out, what will make me a cause of scandal, and I do not care.”
5. Greed: “I have a right to what I want because I want it” “I want it now and do not want to wait.”
6. Jealousy: “I am told that I can not have this thing, therefor I want it, and I will prove a point by taking it.”
7. Rejection of the Path Christ would take: “Christ would be humble, submit to a validly ordained priest and bishop who have refused me, but I am going to do this anyway.”

and I could go on and on and on. Don’t Roman Catholics still preach “Spiritual Communions?” Say you were in a grave circumstance, say you were about to die without any availability for Viaticum. Why would you request Communion from an Orthodox priest and willingly withhold that you are not Orthodox? If you ask and he says no, isn’t it better entering the Kingdom of God fully honest? What’s more likely, in the case of death, he’ll say yes and there’s no cause for concern anyway. Why not, if not about to die, not just receive a “Spiritual Communion” and be the humble servant that Christ modeled for us? I do not understand why a Roman Catholic would be so insistent that they had the right to another communion’s Communion. The arrogance is astounding and rather sickening. Is this not seen as a dark sin on one’s soul? If I felt this way about someone else’s communion I’d go to Confession for it, without even having actually taken their communion. It’s so anti-Christ, such an attitude should be ripped from our souls and not given any foothold.

I think you may have a point there with your list. Perhaps we could speak of an “ecumenism of entitlement” or something of that sort.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I think you may have a point there with your list. Perhaps we could speak of an “ecumenism of entitlement” or something of that sort.

He does “Spiritual Communion”.

This is what one should be thinking about should they “need” to be visting another Church or just not able to receive in their own at the moment.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

This is a good post.

Yes, an actual citation from the CCC, making a point. So effective, in fact, it made one without any additional commentary.

The next section, entitled “Toward Unity”, is equally compelling and speaks to our obligations with respect to ecumenism:

820 “Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.” Christ always gives his Church the gift of unity, but the Church must always pray and work to maintain, reinforce, and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her. This is why Jesus himself prayed at the hour of his Passion, and does not cease praying to his Father, for the unity of his disciples: “That they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be one in us, . . . so that the world may know that you have sent me.” The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit.

821 Certain things are required in order to respond adequately to this call:

• a permanent renewal of the Church in greater fidelity to her vocation; such renewal is the driving-force of the movement toward unity;

• conversion of heart as the faithful “try to live holier lives according to the Gospel”; for it is the unfaithfulness of the members to Christ’s gift which causes divisions;

• prayer in common, because “change of heart and holiness of life, along with public and private prayer for the unity of Christians, should be regarded as the soul of the whole ecumenical movement, and merits the name 'spiritual ecumenism;”’

• fraternal knowledge of each other;

• ecumenical formation of the faithful and especially of priests;

• dialogue among theologians and meetings among Christians of the different churches and communities;

• collaboration among Christians in various areas of service to mankind. “Human service” is the idiomatic phrase.

822 Concern for achieving unity “involves the whole Church, faithful and clergy alike.” But we must realize “that this holy objective - the reconciliation of all Christians in the unity of the one and only Church of Christ - transcends human powers and gifts.” That is why we place all our hope “in the prayer of Christ for the Church, in the love of the Father for us, and in the power of the Holy Spirit.”

 

[GaryTaylor]

How so? Isn’t the Eucharist the Body and Blood of Christ? Can Christ be measured in varying degrees? Is there such a thing as “more Jesus” and “less Jesus”? If the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ, and Christ is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, how can the Eucharist of the Catholics be superior to the Eucharist of the Orthodox?

Good question to contemplate, is there “more Jesus, and less Jesus”? The question then becomes how would the Body and Blood be more superior in the East?

 

[TEPO]

Catholics? And yet, you rejected the use of “Catholics” to mean “Christians in full communion with Rome” rather than answer my question, namely:

" if tomorrow Rome decided that Catholic communion is only for Catholics, does it follow that our consecrations would not be blessed with the Spirit of unity through “one body one Spirit” in Christ?"

I truly do not understand what it is exactly that you’re asking. The Catholic Mass is dedicated to the Father through the unity of the Holy Spirit in union with:* All those who have done his will throughout the ages*… This includes all those of the human race. This cannot change.