Questions On Latin VS. Eastern: and On Othodox Church and Breakaways

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrZetterlund
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MrZetterlund

Guest
I tend to notice that Catholics here in the Latin Rite seem to believe the term “Catholic” belongs ONLY to those in the Latin Rite. I was wondering why this was so? I read in a good ol’ book of mine, Catholicism for Dummies, that both Latin and Eatern Rites were sanctioned by the Bishop of Rome. I guess my question is: Why are Roman Catholics being so exclusive? Are you sure you’re not just being prideful because our inheritence is of St. Peter and Paul who were stationed in Rome?

Also, what the heck is an Orthodox Christian? Are they sanctioned by the Bishop of Rome as well? What are their origins?

One last question: Are break-away churches in communion with Rome? If so, WHY? The reason I ask is because I have Protestants confront me all the time about something they heard from a Catholic that isn’t consistent with official teachings of the Church. And I know it, too, dispite being such a recent convert to the Church.

For example: I recently had the pleasure of disconnecting an ex-Catholic from a false notion she had that Catholics are discouraged from, or aren’t allowed to read the Bible. I pointed out that the entire reason I brought my Bible to work is because Pope Benedict very recently made some book recommendations for a good summer’s read, straight from the Bible. I also talked about how many of the saints read the Bible as well and were a wonderful example to me, and how I felt encouraged to go more in-depth into the Bible, and always recieved wonderful Bible-based answers here on CAF about our faith. I also left my Bible in the lobby and told her she could read it. She was very surprised and heartened to see that. 🙂

I questioned whether she was familiar with a Catholic sect known as “Old Catholic.” She seemed pretty certain she was when I asked her. She almost answered “yes” before I got out the full name of the church.

Another example is I hear some say they also teach you aren’t supposed to wear the Rosary, which has been established many times on this site that you CAN and it is a very good thing. In fact, there has been a recent movement to get teenagers more familiar with the Rosary, in which many were indeed wearing them. People wear it around my school all the time. Which is alright, as long as it is a symbol of faith and devotion and not an ornament or article of jewelry. However, according to some “Catholics”, it’s NOT permitted at all; and neither is it a good thing! :confused:

Just a few questions in my head. Thank you, God bless.
 
Catholics believe that any person, or Rite, that is a part of the Catholic Church, and that accepts the Supremacy of the Pope, is a part of the Catholic Church. That includes ALL of the Eastern Churches that are in Communion with Rome.

It does NOT include the Orthodox, because they chose to separate themselves from the one Church. They are all Apostolic Churches in that they have true Apostolic Succession of their Bishops (regardless of title), and they have completely valid Ordinations and Sacraments. But, they are NOT in Communion with Rome, which places them outside of the “Catholic Church”

It does not include the “Old Catholic Church”, which broke away over the issue of Papal Infallibility, but also has legitimate Apostolic Succession, and completely valid Ordinations and Sacraments. There are a few other Churches that are considered to be in this same category.

The catholic church (Not Capitalized) includes everyone that believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and as the redeemer of mankind. In its uncapitalized form, the word does not refer to any specific church, or church family, but to the “universal” Christian belief system.

As is true in any large organization, you will have a certain percentage of members that have inadequate knowledge of what their church actually teaches. This is true in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, as well as in the various Eastern Rites, in the various Orthodox Churches, in the various Protestant sects, etc., etc., etc.

There are ignorant people, who loudly proclaim their ignorance as if it were truth for the world, in every group of human beings. Their loudness does NOT mean that the majority of people within that group believe as they do.

Sadly, the vast majority of Latin Rite Catholics, especially in the new world, no little or nothing about our Eastern Brethern. That is sad, because their traditions, their liturgies etc. have much to teach us.
 
A few points:

Regarding the “exclusivity” of many Roman Catholics. It is mostly just simple ignorance. Most Roman Catholics have never even heard of the Eastern Catholic Churches. We are small in numbers compared to the Church of Rome.

The term “Orthodox Christian” is usually used by members of the Orthodox churches not in communion with Rome to describe themselves.

Not sure what you mean by the “break-away churches” - but aren’t they by definition not in communion with Rome?
 
First of all, rosaries can be worn on one’s wrist or belt. They are not intended to be a necklace however. In the Eastern Churches, one wears one’s “cord rosary” or prayer rope around the wrist if one wishes to. It is best to get the blessing of a priest in this regard.

An “Orthodox Christian” is one that confesses the faith of Orthodoxy (there are now “Western Orthodox” who are former Roman Catholics, Old Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans and Methodists so the exclusive use of “Eastern Orthodox” is out of date).

The term “Orthodox” comes from the First Ecumenical Council when the heresy of Arius was put down. Then the Fathers used the term “Orthodox” which means “believing correctly” and “worshipping correctly” at the same time. Both Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches today use the term “Orthodox” in describing themselves and it is often used to describe the “Orthodox Faith.”

The schism between East and West was solidified in the 13th century only. What happened in 1054 involved ONLY the churchmen involved and who hurled anathemas against each other (i.e. Cardinal Humbertus and Patriarch Michael Caerularios).

I wouldn’t say that the Orthodox Church somehow “chose” not to be with the Pope. The Orthodox believe Rome fell into heresy, not only on the score of the Filioque in the Nicene Creed, but also on a number of other points. The SSPX and other Roman Catholic groups also believe there was a “disconnect” with respect to Vatican II and the liturgical changes.

The Orthodox Church also uses the term “Catholic Church” and believes the Primacy of the Church now falls to the Patriarch of “New Rome” or Constantinople. However, the anathemas from 1054 have been mutually lifted, but leaving the same issues unresolved.

I believe that the Roman Catholic Church AND the Orthodox Church both together comprise the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church despite their mutual schism that hurts them both, making them less than they could be in God - with the RC Church presenting the unifying Petrine Primacy and the Eastern Churches underscoring the strength and vitality of the Local, Particular Church and the Eastern Christian patrimony.

The Roman Catholic Church today affirms that the basis for the union of the Eastern Catholic Churches in history is one that is null and void for the achievement of unity today. The Roman Catholic Church NEVER said the Orthodox Church is NOT part of the Body of Christ (ergo valid sacraments etc.).

As for reading the Bible, the early Monastics of the united Church of Christ of the desert were obliged to memorize the Gospels and the Book of Psalms. The Seventh Ecumenical Council, I believe, even laid down the rule that priests and bishops are to know the Psalms and other parts of scripture by heart.

Protestants know what the Bible says, to be sure. We know what it actually means . . . 😉

Alex
 
The_Old_Medic said:
Catholics believe that any person, or Rite, that is a part of the Catholic Church, and that accepts the Supremacy of the Pope, is a part of the Catholic Church. That includes ALL of the Eastern Churches that are in Communion with Rome.

It does NOT include the Orthodox, because they chose to separate themselves from the one Church. They are all Apostolic Churches in that they have true Apostolic Succession of their Bishops (regardless of title), and they have completely valid Ordinations and Sacraments. But, they are NOT in Communion with Rome, which places them outside of the “Catholic Church”

It does not include the “Old Catholic Church”, which broke away over the issue of Papal Infallibility, but also has legitimate Apostolic Succession, and completely valid Ordinations and Sacraments. There are a few other Churches that are considered to be in this same category.

The catholic church (Not Capitalized) includes everyone that believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and as the redeemer of mankind. In its uncapitalized form, the word does not refer to any specific church, or church family, but to the “universal” Christian belief system.

As is true in any large organization, you will have a certain percentage of members that have inadequate knowledge of what their church actually teaches. This is true in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, as well as in the various Eastern Rites, in the various Orthodox Churches, in the various Protestant sects, etc., etc., etc.

There are ignorant people, who loudly proclaim their ignorance as if it were truth for the world, in every group of human beings. Their loudness does NOT mean that the majority of people within that group believe as they do.

Sadly, the vast majority of Latin Rite Catholics, especially in the new world, no little or nothing about our Eastern Brethern. That is sad, because their traditions, their liturgies etc. have much to teach us.
Click to expand...
:eek: Well said!! Insightful, comprehsible and informitive!! :extrahappy: Thank you for reminding me why I love this website. 🙂

I wonder what we could do to better inform Catholics of their faith? :hmmm: You are unfortunately right. Ignorance causes alot of hear-say, confusion and causes Cradle Catholics to leave the faith. 😦 It’s as though they grow up with misconceptions and false notions about what it means to be Catholic, and what they believe…

As a former Protestant, I can’t help but admitt that channels like EWTN pulled me further AWAY from the Church over sketchy things like priests calling Muslims our “brothers” (More like distant cousins in my opinion, but I think “brother” should be reserved for the One Baptism in Christ we share as Christians.) As well as some overly-devouted prayers I’ve heard from Mother Angelica towards Mother Mary. Sometimes we Protestants would watch that and think you were making her out to be some sort of goddess. 😦

I think studying history and why the beliefs of the Church are what they are helps, though. 🙂 CAF is especially helpful.

So again, thank you. 👍
 
Alexander_Roman said:
I believe that the Roman Catholic Church AND the Orthodox Church both together comprise the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church despite their mutual schism that hurts them both, making them less than they could be in God - with the RC Church presenting the unifying Petrine Primacy and the Eastern Churches underscoring the strength and vitality of the Local, Particular Church and the Eastern Christian patrimony.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t that make them Two, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Churches? :hmmm:

Or do you go for the whole “invisible catholic Church” idea?
 
MrZetterlund said:
Are you sure you’re not just being prideful because our inheritence is of St. Peter and Paul who were stationed in Rome?
Click to expand...
As everyone else has handled the rest I just want to touch on this.

St Paul was not stationed in Rome.
 
Symeon said:
Not sure what you mean by the “break-away churches” - but aren’t they by definition not in communion with Rome?
Click to expand...
I was refering to the list of churches posted in posted by the user **followingtheway ** in this threadforums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=587893:
followingtheway said:
  • Apostolic Catholic Church
  • American Catholic Church in the United States
  • Bosnian Church (no longer in existence)
  • Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church
  • Catholic Charismatic Church of Canada
  • Celtic Catholic Church
  • Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association
  • Communion of Christ the Redeemer
  • Free Catholic Church
  • Liberal Catholic Church
  • Mariavite Church
  • Old Catholic Church
  • Old Catholic Church of America
  • Old Catholic Church in Europe
  • Palmarian Catholic Church
  • Philippine Independent Church
  • Polish National Catholic Church
  • Sedevacantism
  • Spiritus Christi
  • True Catholic Church
God bless :byzsoc:

David
Click to expand...
Alexander_Roman said:
First of all, rosaries can be worn on one’s wrist or belt. They are not intended to be a necklace however. In the Eastern Churches, one wears one’s “cord rosary” or prayer rope around the wrist if one wishes to. It is best to get the blessing of a priest in this regard.
Click to expand...
This certainly wasn’t St. Louis Marie De Montfort’s position on it, as she portrays our Holy Mother in her book, The Secret of the Rosary, as saying:

“As a reward for this little honor that you paid Me in wearing My Rosary, I have obtained a great grace for you from My Son. Your life will be spared for a few more years. See that you spend these years wisely, and do penance.”

I mean… If it’s not meant to be worn as a necklace… Then why does it look like a necklace? -_- I’ve seen Nunns wear them around their necks on EWTN (Monks as well, I believe.) Besides, I don’t really feel comfortable having it on my wrist or belt. I’m afraid I’ll either lose it or it’ll break. 😦

I had my Rosary blessed by my priest so it serves as a holy reminder of the life of Christ through the eyes of St. Mary and Joseph. I’m not buying another one just to get a cord Rosary. I already asked my priest to pray that **this is the last one I have to buy. ** We both had faith in that, and I suprisingly haven’t lost or broken it yet. 🙂
Alexander_Roman said:
The schism between East and West was solidified in the 13th century only. What happened in 1054 involved ONLY the churchmen involved and who hurled anathemas against each other (i.e. Cardinal Humbertus and Patriarch Michael Caerularios)… the anathemas from 1054 have been mutually lifted, but leaving the same issues unresolved.
Click to expand...
So uh… What happened at the Great Schism? :o
I’ve heard of it but never understood what it was about. 🤷

Anyways, thank you both for your insightful posts contributing to this thread!! :tiphat:

God Bless…
 
MrZetterlund said:
This certainly wasn’t St. Louis Marie De Montfort’s position on it, as she portrays our Holy Mother in her book, The Secret of the Rosary, as saying:
Click to expand...
Just a note: S Louis-Marie de Montfort was a French priest. The name “Marie” is often used that way in French for males. 🙂
 
Regarding wearing Rosaries around one’s neck, my impression is it’s mainly a Western Mediterranean/Latin American cultural thing. EWTN has some Italian connections (Mother Angelica is Italian-American) and also it’s situated in the South in which, I think, a great number of Catholics are now Hispanics.

Up here in a heavily Irish, German, and English area to wear a Rosary as a necklace would be shocking to many people, so I wouldn’t do it.
 
MrZetterlund said:
I mean… If it’s not meant to be worn as a necklace… Then why does it look like a necklace? -_- I’ve seen Nunns wear them around their necks on EWTN (Monks as well, I believe.) Besides, I don’t really feel comfortable having it on my wrist or belt. I’m afraid I’ll either lose it or it’ll break. 😦
Click to expand...
Rosaries don’t look like necklaces to me. They look like traditional prayer beads. 🙂
I’ve never seen nuns or monks wear them as necklaces on EWTN. Nuns and monks generally wear them at their waist, but those are generally very large beads. Street kids in the area where I live are the ones I see wearing a rosary around their neck, and some entertainers. Wasn’t the entertainer Madonna one of those who first made rosaries popular as a fashion accessory?

We do wear our chotkis on our wrists in the East as has been mentioned. It happens that all the chotki I’ve been exposed to are knotted, not beads. I haven’t seen a rosary worn on the wrist either perhaps because the ones I generally see are less sturdy in composition than our knotted Eastern prayer ropes which have no trouble going on and off the wrist. 🙂
 
Alexander_Roman said:
I believe that the Roman Catholic Church AND the Orthodox Church both together comprise the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church despite their mutual schism that hurts them both, making them less than they could be in God - with the RC Church presenting the unifying Petrine Primacy and the Eastern Churches underscoring the strength and vitality of the Local, Particular Church and the Eastern Christian patrimony.
Click to expand...
And how may I ask do you reconcile that with church teaching on that matter?
Alexander_Roman said:
The Roman Catholic Church today affirms that the basis for the union of the Eastern Catholic Churches in history is one that is null and void for the achievement of unity today. The Roman Catholic Church NEVER said the Orthodox Church is NOT part of the Body of Christ (ergo valid sacraments etc.).
Click to expand...
Actually the Church has said on several occassions that those that do not accept the authority of the Pope are not part of the Body of Christ, on occasion, explicitly mentioning ‘The Greeks’. As for Valid sacraments, old catholics have them and no one is going to argue their views are at all compatible with the Catholic faith.
 
TrentCath said:
And how may I ask do you reconcile that with church teaching on that matter?

Actually the Church has said on several occassions that those that do not accept the authority of the Pope are not part of the Body of Christ, on occasion, explicitly mentioning ‘The Greeks’. As for Valid sacraments, old catholics have them and no one is going to argue their views are at all compatible with the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
I believe your views go against what the Church Teaches, especially in the documents of Vatican II.
 
TrentCath said:
Actually the Church has said on several occassions that those that do not accept the authority of the Pope are not part of the Body of Christ, on occasion, explicitly mentioning ‘The Greeks’. As for Valid sacraments, old catholics have them and no one is going to argue their views are at all compatible with the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
We know that this can take place only on the basis of the love of Churches which feel increasingly called to manifest the one Church of Christ, born from one Baptism and from one Eucharist, and which want to be sisters. As I had occasion to say: “the Church of Christ is one. If divisions exist, that is one thing; they must be overcome, but the Church is one, the Church of Christ between East and West can only be one, one and united.”

—Blessed Pope John Paul II, Orientale Lumen
 
MrZetterlund said:
:eek: Well said!! Insightful, comprehsible and informitive!! :extrahappy: Thank you for reminding me why I love this website. 🙂

I wonder what we could do to better inform Catholics of their faith?:
Click to expand...
As a fellow convert, I think it’s important for we, as converts, to try and understand that Catholic is a culture. Or was. This may be especially true for Eastern Catholics.

If you asked someone where they lived, they would tell you the name of their Parish, not their town. I heard of a priest who would stand outside and shake his fist at anyone who drove n m by without crossing themselves. Did you hear your were supposed to? Catholics had a Bible to record marriages, births and deaths in. It was often handed down for generations. No one read it.

Feasts were just that. In the very Catholic town where I live, they process through the streets on “Mary Days.” They have fireworks. The whole town shows up. Like you, I know more about many things Catholic than these cradle Caths, I know Scripture much much more.

But I think, in the end, it’s we who need to become more like them. The Church is their life. If the Bible says anything they need to now, the Priest will read it to them. They pray faithfully, they volunteer endlessly, they pass surrounded by huge families that give great wakes.

We aren’t the ones who have the information about the Faith, they are.
 
TrentCath said:
And how may I ask do you reconcile that with church teaching on that matter?

Actually the Church has said on several occassions that those that do not accept the authority of the Pope are not part of the Body of Christ, on occasion, explicitly mentioning ‘The Greeks’. As for Valid sacraments, old catholics have them and no one is going to argue their views are at all compatible with the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
*Given in Rome at St. Peter’s, November 21, 1964, *Unitatis_Redintegratio
  1. Even in the beginnings of this one and only Church of God there arose certain rifts,(19) which the Apostle strongly condemned.(20) But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions made their appearance and quite large communities came to be separated from full communion with the Catholic Church-for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame. The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church-whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church-do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ’s body,(21) and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.(22)
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
 
Vico said:
*Given in Rome at St. Peter’s, November 21, 1964, *Unitatis_Redintegratio
  1. Even in the beginnings of this one and only Church of God there arose certain rifts,(19) which the Apostle strongly condemned.(20) But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions made their appearance and quite large communities came to be separated from full communion with the Catholic Church-for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame. The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church-whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church-do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ’s body,(21) and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.(22)
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
Click to expand...
This statement safeguards the efficacy of Baptism, The Catholic Church believes that anyone may in case of necessity baptise and that so long as the proper matter and form are followed and the person baptising has the same intention as that of The Church the baptism is valid. As such all whether Catholic OR not must be in valid Baptism baptised into the Body of Christ. However that is not to say:

  1. *]That those so baptised cannot subsequently leave the Body of Christ due to their own views or schism
    *]That they are in ANYWAY Catholic
    *]That they hold The Catholic Faith

    It is also crucial to note that the statement above refers to INDIVIDUALS not GROUPS, there is only ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, it is commonly known as The Roman Catholic Church (that is the church loyal to the Pope in Rome), whilst individuals outside its visible boundaries can be baptised into it and saved groups, that is churches by definiton cannot. This is because they are NOT saved by virtue of being part of that church but by the mercy of God and by virture of being part of the ONE true Church of Christ.

    The statement I was responding to was the idea that the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church were Together the true church of Christ, this is false, the true church of Christs IS the Catholic Church and only the Catholic Church. Whilst individuals outside may by the mercy of God belong to it and be saved, we cannot say whole groups or churches do because they are saved in spite of belong to these groups or churches not because of belonging to them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top