Questions about Orthodoxy

[Kmon23]

And this makes me sad. I would think that rebaptized implies that the Orthodox Church viewed those converting as non-Christians before entering the Orthodox Church.

And why the variance? Is there not one unified teaching on this or is it just the opinion of the priest presiding over the Orthodox parish?

This has nothing to do with whether they are “non-Christians” but just on the theology of the church regarding grace and validity of the sacraments. I will be rebaptized as I enter the Orthodox church, but they do not say it in such a way as to proclaim “your baptism was invalid.” They just tell me that it is fitting that as I enter Orthodoxy, I will start my new life in Christ in the one true church (a belief that will make a Catholic a Catholic, an Orthodox an Orthodox). And also that the church does not know whether baptism is valid outside the Orthodox church, so it is just fitting that I might as well get baptized.

And whether there is one unified teaching, in my previous post there are those main two approaches. However, nonunified teaching is not the same thing as opposing viewpoints (where one must be false). Both can be true, and valid ways of approaching the issue. It’s sort of like how Western Christianity has unleavened bread, chrismation/communion at the age of reason, etc while the Eastern churches use leavened bread, and chrismate/commune at the age of infancy.

And I stress the last point especially that differences are allowable as the different practices that exist between Western and Eastern Christianity are not necessarily opposed to one another. They are just different ways of expression of the Christian faith and life, both equally valid. After all, Latin Catholics and Eastern Catholics differ on those things I’ve mentioned, yet they are still in communion as one church.

 

[dronald]

The penalty is you lose all the spiritual benefits gained from physical asceticism. Depending on how strict your priest is, he might require you to keep the Wednesday and Friday fast before receiving communion on Sunday. I don’t know what other people do, but when I disregard the fast I confess it the same way I confess neglecting my prayer life.

The Paschal Homily of St. John Chrysostom is read as the homily in the Pascha (Easter) service. It tells us: “You sober and you heedless, honor the day. Rejoice today, both you who have fasted and you who have disregarded the fast.”

I have so much trouble with this way of thinking; can you please explain this?

Colossians 2:
18 Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, { Or b about the things he has seen b } puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind,

19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.

20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations –

21 "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch"

22 ( referring to things that all perish as they are used ) – according to human precepts and teachings?

23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

 

[Novocastrian]

One forgets that the Orthodox played these games amongst each other and among the Oriental Churches. It wasn’t just the Latins. Heck the Assyrian Church would bounce into and out of Communion with Rome depending on the political landscape. One often hears the Latins did this and did that underhanded act – they did and are to be chastized. One hardly hears the same about internal usurptions, assassinations, bribes and other intrigues - sometimes among the same family members.

Besides, try to see it from the Latin Jesuit perspective. We’re good enough to educate the Orthodox by the bishop’s order - even though we are in full union with the Pope, which means they don’t think the Pope or the Jesuits are heretics. If not heretics, why should there be any separation among them. The Jesuits acted to end the separation as they thought at the time appropriate - remember, with the Orthodox bishop’s approved mandate to act in their lands. It’s not a far stretch to assume union was imminent.

This is very true. I suppose it’s worth keeping two things in mind: (1) the Sublime Porte kept all Christians in a state of constant disarray in order to maintain political control of the Levant and to extort money from wealthy Christians; (2) Christians of all stripes, being sinful men, often cooperated or sought advantage from this state of affairs.

Very little in the period is black and white.

 

[josie_L]

It is true that the love flows one way, with Catholicism making many gestures to give a hand to Orthodoxy, while Orthodoxy remains largely divided about this (some say ecumenism is the greatest heresy while those such as Metropolitan Kallistos Ware are very ecumenical).

And whether the baptisms are invalid (and sacraments are invalid), I would not say this is any indication on the Orthodox view of Catholicism. Orthodox theology on the sacraments is different than Catholicism, and unlike Catholicism that says Orthodox have valid sacraments from valid apostolic succession/intent/form/etc., Orthodox theology holds to a view closer to the idea that sacraments only have grace within the Church. So for those outside the church, we just don’t know with certainty.

So with the view that baptisms are invalid for Catholicism, this has nothing to do with any antagonistic feelings towards Catholicism, but just the result of Orthodox theology regarding the sacraments.

Also I will wholeheartedly disagree with your comment that you will always be an outsider unless you are Greek or Russian. I am South Korean, and the only Asian in my parish. I think I stand as an example in opposition to what you are claiming, so there is that.

Within Orthodoxy itself there is latitude concerning Catholic sacraments, i.e., there are some Orthodox autocephalous churches that do believe Catholic sacraments are grace-filled.

p.s. Here’s what Metropolitan Hilarion (Russia) said in 2009 :

From Vertograd Orthodox Journal, Newsletter No. 76, Oct. 21, 2009 (via the Irenikon listserv):

“To all intent and purposes, mutual recognition of each others Mysteries already exists between us. We do not have communion in the Mysteries, but we do recognize each others Mysteries”, declared Archbishop Hilarion (Alfeev) on the air during a broadcast of the program “The Church and the World” on the television channel “Russia”, on October 17th (video and text, vera.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=237432).

“If a Roman Catholic priest converts to Orthodoxy, we receive him as a priest, and we do not re-ordain him. And that means that, de facto, we recognize the Mysteries of the Roman Catholic Church”, explained Archbishop Hilarion.

Responding to the question of whether Roman Catholics can receive Communion from the Orthodox, or Orthodox Christians from the Roman Catholics, Archbishop Hilarion said that such giving of Communion should not take place, inasmuch as “eucharistic communion has been broken” between the Orthodox and Roman Catholics. But, at the same time, he made clear that in some cases such Communion is possible: “Exceptional cases occur, when, for example, a Roman Catholic is dying in some town where there is no Roman Catholic priest at all in the vicinity. So he asks an Orthodox priest to come. Then in such a case, I think, the Orthodox priest should go and give Communion to that person.”

eirenikon.wordpress.com/2009/…ic-sacraments/

I also believe that the Syrian Orthodox Church and the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church accept our sacraments as grace-filled.

 

[Kmon23]

I have so much trouble with this way of thinking; can you please explain this?

Colossians 2:
18 Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, { Or b about the things he has seen b } puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind,

19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.

20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations –

21 "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch"

22 ( referring to things that all perish as they are used ) – according to human precepts and teachings?

23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

I think you might be reading too much into what was said. From the bolded part, I don’t think he is saying we should be forced into fasting. However there are disciplines in the church that is meant for our benefit. In no way is it meant to be forced upon us. If we cannot hold the fasts, then we don’t need to maintain the fasts. I know of Catholic who due to health reasons does not follow any of the fasting regulations, and he is a Catholic in good standing. And his post about confession, that is strictly between the layperson and the spiritual father, so there is nothing to comment about that. This is something worked out between those two for the spiritual journey and salvation of the lay person, so should not be used as being applicable to all Orthodox christians (or Christians in general). For example, I know of a priest that does not force us to fast, but just tells us to fast if we can take it.

 

[josie_L]

And this makes me sad. I would think that rebaptized implies that the Orthodox Church viewed those converting as non-Christians before entering the Orthodox Church.

And why the variance? Is there not one unified teaching on this or is it just the opinion of the priest presiding over the Orthodox parish?

From my research, no, there is no one unified teaching within Orthodoxy, what I would suggest you do is view the information that I posted on another thread concerning this issue (it’s all documented and mainly from Orthodox sources).

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=850180

p.s. There is one website from a Russian Archimandrite that is absolutely fascinating (he gives a history regarding reception of converts of the early Church and then of Russia).

holy-trinity.org/ecclesiology/pogodin-reception/reception-ch4.html

 

[Kmon23]

Within Orthodoxy itself there is latitude concerning Catholic sacraments, i.e., there are some Orthodox autocephalous churches that do believe Catholic sacraments are grace-filled.

p.s. Here’s what Metropolitan Hilarion (Russia) said in 2009 :

I also believe that the Syrian Orthodox Church and the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church accept our sacraments as grace-filled.

Yes, of course there are those within the church that hold to the belief that Catholicism has grace-filled valid sacraments. I just meant that it’s not proclaimed with absolute certainty, unlike Catholicism that has the consensus that Orthodoxy has valid sacraments. For Orthodoxy there is still wiggle room for debate and talk for either position and is not a closed discussion.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

I actually find Orthodoxy more difficult in some regards. The fasting regimen is much more intense. Not everyone follows it to the letter, because you are only supposed to do what you can. But technically, there are like 90+ days throughout the year where you aren’t supposed to eat meat (excluding only shellfish), dairy products, and oil (generally only olive oil). I grant myself regular fish during this period because of my Catholic origins though. I couldn’t handle it otherwise. This doesn’t even include most of the Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year where you are supposed to fast as well. So almost half the year you are fasting in Orthodoxy. Catholic fasting is a cakewalk compared to that, at least in the USA.

Majority of Catholics live in South America, Africa and Asia-Pacific and Catholics in all those areas take fasting very very seriously. They fast twice a week all year long. I know many Catholics from this background who fast Wednesday and Friday EVERY week of the year not just for feasts or special occasions. It’s the norm in the country where they originally come from.

The point is not to generalise about either faith when it comes to practice.

 

[slh3016]

Thanks to everyone who has commented. My knowledge has increased tremendously and I’m still trying to wrap my brain around it all.

From that perspective, I’m now of the opinion that unless one has a graduate degree in church history or theology, or just really has a fascination with those topics (and the time to devote to researching the claims of both sides), it’s a coin-toss between the two, EO and Catholicism. Sorry, but that’s just how I see it.

The things I know for sure are:

1. God loves us (We all agree on that)
2. Jesus died for His Church (Again, we all agree)
3. He established ONE visible Church (We all agree on ONE, Orthodox and Catholics agree on visible)
4. We are to seek God, obey Him, and love Him in everything we do (Can I hear an “Amen”?)
5. When we fail, there is forgiveness (We all say “Hallelujah!”)
6. The Eucharist is the body and blood of Jesus (Catholics and Orthodox say “Amen!”)

I’m leaving it to Him to sort out the rest of the details of my salvation. I’m going to stop trying to “figure out” who has been right and wrong in the last 1,000 years of world history between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. I believe fingers can be pointed at both sides at various times and often simultaneously. Again, thanks for the info from both sides!

[SIGN]RCIA, Here I come![/SIGN]

 

[SAVINGRACE]

(continued from last post)

1. I can’t speak for all Orthodox, but I’m sure there are some Orthodox who feel resentment towards Catholicism due to what happened in the past (such as the sacking of Constantinople during the crusades, although as far as I know, this is not the Vatican’s fault per say). Some Orthodox also mention how the Western Church has suppressed Eastern Christianity, but not sure on the details of what they mean. Regardless, it’s been Eastern Christianity that has suffered a significant amount from heresies (Pelagianism, Arianism, and the rest of the ‘-isms’), and the fact that Hagia Sophia has been long gone from Orthodox ownership for a while. Also, the fact that there have been Orthodox relics and artifacts taken by Western Christianity during the Crusades. However, as a gesture of kindness Pope John Paull II (may he rest in peace) has returned some of the relics that were taken during the Crusades, such as the relics of Saint John Chrysostom in 2004. So any resentment would be the result of the crusades, pillaging of relics/artifacts, heresies and suppression in general in Orthodoxy’s long history (Turks, Ottoman Empire, Communism). All together, it might lead to a feeling of resentment in general towards anything that has been a source of suppression (albeit in the past).
   I do not share the history as my Orthodox brethren (I’m a South Korean catechumen), but I understand where the resentment may come from.

However at the same time, this is something that many Orthodox probably don’t even think about anymore, so it’s probably not that pervasive. And whether they would rather you stay a Protestant than become Catholic, I would wholeheartedly choose Catholicism as they are much closer in theology to Orthodoxy than Protestantism. After all, there is a shared heritage between Catholicism and Orthodoxy (we used to be one church after all!!!). However, I am only speaking for myself here. Generally, I do not think there is this pervasive thought against Catholicism.

1. And yes, I think many Orthodox will say Catholicism under-emphasizes the differences (such as purgatory). Many Catholics will insist that we all believe in the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, etc. while many Orthodox will shake their heads and say that they reject them.

Yes similarly the Russian Communist government ransacked and persecuted the Romanian-Greek Catholics, arrested all their Bishops and confiscated all their Churches and Church relics and handed it over to the Russian Orthodox Church. Nothing has been returned. This was done because they refused to return to Orthodoxy. There was a decree given which wiped the Church from existence. This has bred resentment amongst Catholics in that region.

There are other examples. I don’t live in the past and don’t like focussing on the negative events of the past, however, they do serve to make us understand better why some on both sides are suspicious and hateful and to a certain extent that is useful for those on both sides who wish to maintain the status quo.

 

[Rohzek]

Majority of Catholics live in South America, Africa and Asia-Pacific and Catholics in all those areas take fasting very very seriously. They fast twice a week all year long. I know many Catholics from this background who fast Wednesday and Friday EVERY week of the year not just for feasts or special occasions. It’s the norm in the country where they originally come from.

The point is not to generalise about either faith when it comes to practice.

I am not sure if you are seconding my last statement, or if you are stating that I was generalizing…

If it is the latter, then I shall further clarify. I was talking to a fellow American, a fellow Southerner no less. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has had a dispensation on US Catholics for a very relaxed fasting regimen for decades. Hence, why I said what I said. And further clarified, “in the US at least.”

 

[SAVINGRACE]

I am not sure if you are seconding my last statement, or if you are stating that I was generalizing…

If it is the latter, then I shall further clarify. I was talking to a fellow American, a fellow Southerner no less. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has had a dispensation on US Catholics for a very relaxed fasting regimen for decades. Hence, why I said what I said. And further clarified, “in the US at least.”

I am stating that what US Catholics do differs from what the majority of Catholics do in the rest of the world.

 

[Vanez]

But it varies, i.e., I know of some Catholics who were rebaptized (some of whom were on these forums) when they converted to Orthodoxy.

and I know a Protestants who were rebaptized when they converted to Roman Catholicism I think this has something to do with which denomination these people belonged to, Oneness Pentecostalism for the example.

 

[Rohzek]

Lots of posts about the past stuff, such as city sacking, property confiscation, etc. There is plenty of that to go around for all sides, so I am not sure why we are bringing up counter points against Orthodoxy. I am in no way trying to deny past mistakes, but rather making the point that the follow-ups are not the topic of concern here at the moment. It was originally asked why some Orthodox are hostile to Catholicism. People such as myself pointed out past tragedies as an explanation. The initial question was thus answered. Why some have felt it necessary to point out Orthodoxy’s past aggressions, is somewhat perplexing since it does not concern the original question. In fact, it just begins a cycle of finger pointing and a pissing contest of “who’s better.” If your goal is start that kind of contest, then I suggest another thread would be more suitable.

Now as for certain terms used against those who leave one church for another, I must say I don’t think anyone of us should really care all that much. If you are leaving one church for another because you disagree with the former’s core beliefs, then why does it matter if they call you a certain term? I don’t think it matters really. And if they truly are so upset by it, mock their weak sensibilities.

 

[RyanBlack]

and I know a Protestants who were rebaptized when they converted to Roman Catholicism I think this has something to do with which denomination these people belonged to, Oneness Pentecostalism for the example.

Oneness Pentecostals do not use the Trinitarian formula, so they do not have valid baptisms.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

and I know a Protestants who were rebaptized when they converted to Roman Catholicism I think this has something to do with which denomination these people belonged to, Oneness Pentecostalism for the example.

Yes, some denominations are not viewed as having valid Baptisms. Any church which does not baptise in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not valid in the CC, the person has to be re-baptised when they convert.

 

[slh3016]

Lots of posts about the past stuff, such as city sacking, property confiscation, etc. There is plenty of that to go around for all sides, so I am not sure why we are bringing up counter points against Orthodoxy. I am in no way trying to deny past mistakes, but rather making the point that the follow-ups are not the topic of concern here at the moment. It was originally asked why some Orthodox are hostile to Catholicism. People such as myself pointed out past tragedies as an explanation. The initial question was thus answered. Why some have felt it necessary to point out Orthodoxy’s past aggressions, is somewhat perplexing since it does not concern the original question. In fact, it just begins a cycle of finger pointing and a pissing contest of “who’s better.” If your goal is start that kind of contest, then I suggest another thread would be more suitable.

Now as for certain terms used against those who leave one church for another, I must say I don’t think anyone of us should really care all that much. If you are leaving one church for another because you disagree with the former’s core beliefs, then why does it matter if they call you a certain term? I don’t think it matters really. And if they truly are so upset by it, mock their weak sensibilities.

Yes, you are absolutely correct. I did ask why some Orthodox are currently hostile toward Catholicism. I just had no idea that the grudge was so deeply rooted in historical events versus philosophical/theological differences. I guess I was a bit naive in that, especially since I wouldn’t expect our Orthodox friend (whose family has been Orthodox for less than 30 years) and who are American to be hostile or antagonistic toward Catholics because of something that a) took place centuries ago and b) their ancestors or ethnicity were not directly affected

Therefore, I assumed the hostility was more of a “current” nature or prejudice but I haven’t seen sufficient enough reason for that, especially when the Catholic Church seems to be trying to be ecumenical and embracing. However, I suppose if the issue of the papal authority is the hill you are going to live and die by on both sides, ecumenicalism and/or reconciliation is utterly impossible since neither side is going to budge on their positions.

 

[Kmon23]

and I know a Protestants who were rebaptized when they converted to Roman Catholicism I think this has something to do with which denomination these people belonged to, Oneness Pentecostalism for the example.

Catholicism specifically specifies the validity of baptism based on denomination, and will baptize or not baptize accordingly.
Orthodox will most likely outright reject all forms of baptism for converts from nontrinitarian baptisms. For converts from trinitarian denominations, then it’s either by chrismation or rebaptism depending on the jurisdiction and discretion of the bishop.

 

[Reuben_J]

It was originally asked why some Orthodox are hostile to Catholicism. People such as myself pointed out past tragedies as an explanation. The initial question was thus answered.

Christian history are often laden with atrocities and without love for each other fellow Christians. When that happened the word of Jesus ‘that they will be known as my disciples by their love for each other’, is thrown to the drain. These must be the lowest moments in our history. The descendants of the aggressors and the victims are both still living today but especially the victims who, perhaps of no fault of their own, still nurse the hurt arising from the consequence of injustice imposed on their ancestors. It is a terrible thing that can happen to one’s mind especially as it still affects one’s thinking. In Christianity that can be obstacle to witness the love of Christ, for how can we love freely when we still keep the resentment in our hearts.

The present generation of Catholics do recognize this travesty of justice done on the Orthodox and the guilt must be carried down deep in their psychic. That too can be obstacle to them to freedom of loving as Christ does.

We can only pray that God will heal those wounds and in his time everything will be alright. It may seems insurmountable but in God everything is possible.

God bless us all.

Reuben

 

[josie_L]

and I know a Protestants who were rebaptized when they converted to Roman Catholicism I think this has something to do with which denomination these people belonged to, Oneness Pentecostalism for the example.

Oneness Pentecostalism don’t believe in the Trinity therefore that is why they would be baptized, and the CC would never rebaptize if the person can confirm they were baptized in the Trinitarian formula (with water).