ROCOR Western Rite Charter

[HomeschoolDad]

I marriage preparation is more extensive in my archdiocese and is a requirement prior to a Catholic marriage.

That is good, the more the better. What I refer to, is the kind of “marriage preparation on steroids” that would be needed to screen out all (or many) “annulments waiting to happen”. I’d like to see it, I’d certainly go along with it myself, but I can foresee that many would not stand for it. If I were interviewing couples for marriage, and if I were allowed to ask the questions I’d like to ask — which would vary with the dynamic of each couple, their personalities, and so on — I can foresee situations where I’d have to advise the couple either to postpone the marriage, or reconsider it entirely. I knew of one such case — they weren’t formally engaged yet, but she was trying to get him into conflict-resolution counseling. Perhaps I’m just naive, but I have to think the mere fact of even needing this kind of counseling, indicates this is a marriage that shouldn’t take place. (Thankfully, it didn’t, they broke up.) Better to walk while you can, than have it blow up in your face when it’s too late.

 

[PilgrimMichelangelo]

The EP is not an eastern pope. Even if he does mnake a statement, calling that the position of “Orthodoxy” is [insert verb here about inaccurate statements’

Hear, hear! As an Orthodox Christian, I second that. Pastorally this is a question that varies from priest to priest, jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The EP may claim to speak for the Orthodox Church, but he does not in fact speak for Orthodoxy in the way that the Pope speaks for Catholicism. With all due respect, he is increasingly seen as a power hungry prelate clutching at fragments of a long vanquished Hellenic Church and Empire that now seeks to extend his jurisdiction universally over all of world Orthodoxy, twisting canons and causing schisms with the other local Churches in order to bolster his tenuous position. Really, only an Ecumenical Council can speak for the Orthodox Church authoritatively, and even then a Council can only be proclaimed Ecumenical by a succeeding Council. All legislation then issued, such as the so called “mendacious” document on birth control linked above is therefore only limited to the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and does not affect the other autocephalous churches, nor do such documents have authority to change existing teaching passed down from previous Councils.

Think of it as a pastoral gloss, or concession for the faithful of the EP.

 

[ReaderT]

and he can administer certain sacraments validly (if illictly).

Ah, if the Catholics want the men they ordained to retain that ability, that’s their business and their church of course.

They may have no choice but to tolerate the present situation.

I respectfully disagree - they always have a choice. They can’t look at an ocean of defective sacraments and say “well, it can’t be any other way.” Of course it can - they’re sacraments: if they’re not being done how you believe the Lord intended them (i.e. validly), that’d have to be fixed - there’s no other option.

and all of this would, in today’s world and today’s Church, drive many (and possibly most) couples away — “this is just too much hassle,

I don’t believe their opinion should change your mind - people also say it’s too extreme to refrain from premarital sex “in today’s world”. But you believe the church has to do what’s right, regardless of anyone’s opinion. So it has to have valid sacraments then too, right?

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

and he can administer certain sacraments validly (if illictly).

Ah, if the Catholics want the men they ordained to retain that ability, that’s their business and their church of course.

No, we have really have no choice, it goes back to the Western, Roman Christian view that sacraments are durable, “sticky” if you will, and that permanent marks on one’s soul are just that — permanent — and cannot be erased, cannot disintegrate, even if we might wish, for instance, that an apostate or renegade priest could just “quit being a priest” and quit being able to confer valid sacraments outside the unity of the Church. (Matrimony makes no such “mark”, only baptism, confirmation, and holy orders do that.)

A corollary to that is that, in Catholic theology, sacraments can exist “on their own” — with regard to ordination, for instance, we acknowledge that vagante bishops and priests can confer valid sacraments, and with regard to the liturgy, valid consecration can take place in schismatic churches. A good analogy to make might be that Catholics regard sacraments as being valid “off the grid” (the “grid” here being the Church), whereas — correct me if I’m wrong — the Orthodox believe that sacraments need “jumper cables” to connect them to the “power supply” of the Orthodox Church. Am I seeing this correctly?

The more scholarly way to put this, is that Catholics have an Augustinian view of the sacraments, whereas Orthodox have a Cyprianic view, but I know you know that already.

HomeschoolDad:

They may have no choice but to tolerate the present situation.

I respectfully disagree - they always have a choice. They can’t look at an ocean of defective sacraments and say “well, it can’t be any other way.” Of course it can - they’re sacraments: if they’re not being done how you believe the Lord intended them (i.e. validly), that’d have to be fixed - there’s no other option.

Then, following your reasoning, the Church would be bound under pain of mortal sin to say “look, we’re getting a 50% ‘return rate’ on these marriages we’re allowing people to confect, so we’ve got to get this stopped, we’ve got to put these people through a lengthy, invasive process of scrutiny, like a ‘catechumenate of matrimony’, and if they decide to ‘take a walk’, so be it”. I am tempted to come to such a conclusion myself.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I sense that, at this point, you might be saying “…or the Roman Church could just admit that Orthodoxy is right about this, that valid sacramental marriages can end, or that even if they don’t ‘end’ sacramentally, the Church can and should use economia to indulge human weakness and frailty, and allow second marriages after a period of penance and discernment”. I know you are an honest agent in this discussion, and I apologize if I appear to be “putting words in your mouth”, so if I am incorrect in my assessment, just tell me so.

I think the scenario I described — “could sacramental marriages be said to ‘dissolve’ in the same manner that the Holy Eucharist ‘dissolves’ in nature?” — could be a concession to the Orthodox, if Rome ever chose to entertain that theory. I cannot believe that in 1000 years of the separation of the Western and Eastern Church, this concept has never been proposed. I could be wrong. Does anybody in the forum know? After all, Our Lord did say “let no man put asunder”, He didn’t say “it can’t be sundered regardless of what any man might do”.

HomeschoolDad:

and all of this would, in today’s world and today’s Church, drive many (and possibly most) couples away — “this is just too much hassle,

I don’t believe their opinion should change your mind - people also say it’s too extreme to refrain from premarital sex “in today’s world”. But you believe the church has to do what’s right, regardless of anyone’s opinion. So it has to have valid sacraments then too, right?

No, I believe that the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, has to do whatever it has to, to lead souls to salvation. That might mean taking one pastoral approach over another pastoral approach, where neither approach is perfect, and no “perfect pastoral approach” to Problem X exists. Two hundred years ago, the cudgel of eternal damnation was held over people’s heads, and it worked. That wouldn’t work today, people’s mindsets are just too different (due to the malignant influence of an unbelieving world), many could say (and many do say), in so many words, “the church down the street doesn’t condemn me for what I do, or what my lifestyle or life circumstances are, they’re good people, they believe a lot of good things, they don’t make me feel bad about myself and destroy my self-esteem, and besides, we all worship the same God, don’t we?”. People perceive themselves as having options. Where the free will and consent of another person or people is concerned, the Church just has to “give it her best shot” — if someone comes to confession and persuades the priest they are sorry for their sins when in fact they aren’t, if someone approaches the Holy Table unworthily, if a couple approaches the Church for matrimony with possibly-invalidating issues within themselves that aren’t obvious to anyone — not even themselves — beyond a certain point, maybe it just can’t be helped.

 

[dochawk]

we’ve reached the point of no return.

And, no, i won’t spend time answering questions cast in a western framework; it’s pointless.

I’ll leave it for the Orthodox here if they wish–but they won’t give you western answers, either . . .

 

[AlNg]

i won’t spend time answering questions cast in a western framework; it’s pointless.

You were the one who brought up the question of being mendacious. Now you are retreating.

If it were not for the ROC, Rome and Byzantium could be in communion with the rest of Eastern Orthodoxy by year’s end. But Russian nationalism is in the way . . .

You claim that it is Russian nationalism that is preventing a reunion, which I doubt. If the Orthodox cannot agree on such a small issue as to whether or not the Orthodox Church has no dogmatic objection to the use of artificial birth control within certain limits, - if they cannot agree on that - how do you expect the Orthodox to come to an agreement by the end of this year on being in communion with the Roman Catholic Church? There are a whole lot of issues involved here. It is difficult to believe that all these questions could be solved by the end of this year if it were not for Russian nationalism.

“there is no individual, including the EP, that cannot speak authoritatively on behalf of Orthodoxy”

OK. So how then would this reunion between the Orthodox and Roman Catholics come about by the end of this year?

 

[ReaderT]

A good analogy to make might be that Catholics regard sacraments as being valid “off the grid” (the “grid” here being the Church), whereas — correct me if I’m wrong — the Orthodox believe that sacraments need “jumper cables” to connect them to the “power supply” of the Orthodox Church. Am I seeing this correctly?

It is kind of like that; I think we would just say: “When you lose your Orthodoxy, you lose apostolic succession.” The fact that some heretic Bishop put his hands on someone is of no account, because if he’s been cut off from the life-giving Body of Christ (like a branch that’s been cut off), he has nothing left to pass on. The Orthodoxy is more important; hands are secondary.

Then, following your reasoning, the Church would be bound under pain of mortal sin to say “look, we’re getting a 50% ‘return rate’ on these marriages we’re allowing people to confect, so we’ve got to get this stopped, we’ve got to put these people through a lengthy, invasive process of scrutiny, like a ‘catechumenate of matrimony’, and if they decide to ‘take a walk’, so be it”. I am tempted to come to such a conclusion myself.

I sense that, at this point, you might be saying “…or the Roman Church could just admit that Orthodoxy is right about this, that valid sacramental marriages can end, or that even if they don’t ‘end’ sacramentally, the Church can and should use economia to indulge human weakness and frailty, and allow second marriages after a period of penance and discernment”. I know you are an honest agent in this discussion, and I apologize if I appear to be “putting words in your mouth”, so if I am incorrect in my assessment, just tell me so.

Honestly, I was just bringing things to their logical conclusion:. I’m not saying the RCC should adopt one solution over another. I just found it odd that, given ~50% of marriage sacraments are found to be null, the RC church wouldn’t see that as a major problem and be doing more to urgently rectify it. If any other sacrament was found null and void about half the time (Eucharist? ordination? baptism? Last rites?!) it would be a major problem, so I assume the same would/should be the same about marriage.

After all, Our Lord did say “let no man put asunder”,

True, which is why we view it as a pitiable thing when the marriage breaks apart because of the reckless actions of a spouse (an affair, drug problem, alcoholism, etc.)

No, I believe that the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, has to do whatever it has to, to lead souls to salvation. That might mean taking one pastoral approach over another pastoral approach, where neither approach is perfect, and no “perfect pastoral approach” to Problem X exists.

That’s fair. No matter what you do, you won’t get 100% objectively-proven valid marriages, so I understand.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Until the repose of Fr. Serge Kehler of blessed memory a couple (few?) years ago, one could find him celebrating the Ukrainian Catholic Divine Liturgy in Irish in Dublin. ( noone would have suggested a different name for that language to him!!!)

When (not if) I scratch Ireland off my “bucket list”, I am going to have to make it a point, to get to that church and see if they are still doing that. I’m trying to imagine what that would be like.

I am constantly in search of an EU “bolthole” for my son (EU citizen, sadly, I’m not) in case life in this country would ever become intolerable (President Kamala Harris and Vice President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, anyone?), and more economical college tuition would also be a factor. He’s been to Poland three times and, I’m sorry to say, it’s not one bit to his liking, he is Southern American good ole boy to the bone — I like Poland OK, but it’s a monoculture in the extreme, and I find it culturally claustrophobic after a week or two. Ireland is English-speaking, has a very high standard of living, Americans are generally well-regarded, they use the euro, and citizens have the right of unhindered migration to any other EU country. I’ve viewed Google Street View scenes chosen at random, and the homes and townhouses look very nice. Seems to be a pretty hard place to beat. (And I’ve heard good things about Supermac’s too. :ireland: )

 

[dochawk]

When (not if) I scratch Ireland off my “bucket list”, I am going to have to make it a point, to get to that church and see if they are still doing that. I’m trying to imagine what that would be like.

At the time, it met in borrowed space, at sa Catholic university chapel, iirc.

When it comes time, search for something like “Dublin Ukrainian Catholic Mission”