Should I check out a Russian or a Greek church first?

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t find Orthodoxy innovative, at least what I have read and understood of it, which is most likely a LOT less extensive and deep than your experience. But what I do see in the first 1,000 years is zero proof of papal infallibility. Honorius I really throws a monkey wrench in that for one thing but also we see popes respected, given a primacy of honor, respected because they were the Church of “Old Rome” where Peter and Paul were martyred, the capital of the empire for so long, and the had a strong and venerable tradition and episcopacy there. We don’t see popes dictating over the entire Church universal. I see more evidence of what Meyendorff terms a “Eucharistic Ecclesiology” than this idea of a univerally supreme pontiff that can unilaterally direct all the Church. I read of men who disagreed with popes, varying opinions about the relationship of Peter to the Chair of the pope, and I see a conciliar Church guided by emperors/secular powers when heresies arose. The Orthodox have developed theological opinions over the years, of course. But their liturgy remains pure, they have a propensity to just leave a mystery a mystery without having to define and legislate and explain minutia, and their polity has not really changed either. They seem to have, as Rahb, puts it, more of a mystical “come and see” lex orandi lex credendi approach rather than scholastic, extensive attempts to explain the divine.

I myself have actually not been a fan of Orthodoxy for a long time now, mostly due to their Atonement views. As I have studied them and found Catholicism abundantly unsettling in so many ways, I have come to find them compelling and fascinating. I think their hypothesis that Catholicism and Protestantism are two sides of the same coin could be legit…

The trouble with this analysis is that is it is ahistorical and flat out wrong. Rome left the other Patriarchates? When was that? When was it that “the other three” reached a consensus - and why then? What is the current situation, and how does it impact on the reality of talking about “one left the other three”?

The many things that the Eastern Orthodox think are wrong with the Catholic church have varied greatly over the years. You may posit, for example, that azymes are not a problem, but some EOs have very, very strongly disagreed at one time or another. And when did the innovation of Byzantine absolutism set in: why on earth would a theological method, eg scholasticism be an impediment to communion?

You may buy in to the mythos of constant and unchanging Byzantine theology, praxis, and ecclesiology, and from that premise argue about the Catholic miscalculation. But that perspective is flawed by the false assumption. Scholars of the Byzantine tradition, like Fr Taft SJ, see the matter differently and think that the EOs need to dispel their cherished but deluded self-mythology, come to grips with actual history, and, in his words: “grow up”.

EOs certainly agree that they can’t abide Western ecclesiology. But note that they have been unable to do so for nearly a millenium before the there was a promulgation of the idea of papal infallibility. But do they have a clear idea of their own ecclesiology? Just look at the current discussion of Apst Canon 34 among EOs - not only in different jurisdictions (EP vs the world), but also, say in today’s OCA (read it, among the other stuff and weep: monomakhos.com/category/michalopulos-blog/
ocanews.org/). Or tell me, what are the prerogatives of metropolitans versus bishops in the Antiochian church?

It is easy to overlook so much among partners in tradition, but to be so strict in scrutiny among those in other traditions. So be it. But it is not unfair to call that grumpiness.

 

[dvdjs]

I’m quite sorry, I should make sure that I don’t have my own experiences, nor share them, because after all, it is obvious and a fact that yours are far more “extensive” and more true than someone who’s actually, you know, practicing Orthodoxy. Frankly dvdjs you come across as condescending and rude. You catch more flies with vinegar than honey, and aren’t you trying to bring us schismatics (in my case even a former Roman! The horror!) back to Rome? You’re not going to do it by being patronizing to those you hope to convert.

It may not be obvious that my experience in Orthodox practice is more extensive than yours, but it is. You have been practicing with Orthodox for what - half a year? It is always a good idea to spend considerable time learning before trying to teach.

The assumptions that you make about me, personally, really miss the mark. Suffice it to say: I do not proselytize EOs; the idea that I would want to is strange and not born out in anything that I’ve said or written. I have a life-long love of Byzantine Christianity. I am confident that it - even the OCA and AOCANA - will survive antics of well-meaning but curiously misinformed and/or misguided neophytes, but feel that it is not altogether bad to help that along, as the occasion arises, by dispelling the misinformation - especially misinformation that attacks the Catholic church and/or raises false barriers to the unity of all.

I find this interesting coming from a Byzantine Catholic, when in the Eastern forum right now there’s a thread on how Eastern Catholicism is dying, how they need to re-awaken the ethnic, tribal identities that those parishes exist to serve. “Reaching out” seems to be quite insular in your flavor of Roman Catholicism.

How sweet - “flavor of Roman Catholicism”. Did you make that up on your own, or was that in discussion with other EOs who don’t talk about us? As far as reaching out goes, I think the BCC, while it never brought in large groups like the EOC, or the HOOM, is not doing so badly all things considered. But if you want to discuss this honestly, I invite you to go to the relevant thread.

But we do not agree, dvdjs, nor I doubt shall we, and your posts serve no purpose for me, so if I don’t respond to you again, it will be simply because I’ve blocked your posts.

That’s OK. I still find it worthwhile for the sake of others who may mistake misinformation for truth to provide reality checks.

 

[5Loaves]

Bizantine and Roman rite is your faith and you spent lent with the Greek Orthodox?

Do I see a contradiction here, or am I missunderstanding something? Maybe you could explain it, because I’m really curious. Thanks.

It’s not a contradiction for an Eastern Catholic. On weeknights during Great Lent we have Great Compline, Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, Bridegroom Orthros/Matins. My parish is too small to have most of these services. So many of us go to Orthodox Churches for these. In my parish we are all commuters, including especially our priest (my commute is 50 mins and a $5 bridge toll, $6 for evening services), so we have mainly Presanctified every Friday and then Holy Unction on Great and Holy Wednesday, Divine Liturgy followed by 12 Gospels on Great and Holy Thursday, on Holy Friday we have Royal Hours, Vespers of the Taking-Down from the Cross, Matins and The Lamentation at the Tomb, Great and Holy Saturday afternoon, vesperal Divine Liturgy and in the evening Reading of Acts followed by Matins and Pascal Vigil beginning at midnight and then Agape meal after Liturgy, around 3:00AM. We got home at 5:30AM this Pascha.

I prefer to go to the Russian Orthodox for services when my parish has none because their services including the music will be just like ours. The Greek services are the same but with Greek instead of Slavonic and the music is of course entirely different, and the Greeks have pews but when I’m there few people are there so about half of us stand in the aisles which works fine. But really it’s just the the Russians are what I’m most at home with on all levels. But the Russians are 50 minutes drive and a bridge toll so doing three or four of those each week of Great Lent is just too much. The Greek Orthodox Cathedral is a 15 minute drive. I do go to the Russian Orthodox the four nights of the Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete the first week of Great Lent, and again the fifth week of the Great Lent for the Great Canon with the Life of St. Mary of Egypt read at Orthros.

Re the “Roman Rite” part, I am a catechist trained by the Latin Church and serving as such in a Latin Church a few blocks from my home. I’m involved in that parish in other ways, including often daily Mass. I have many good friends in the parish. I also go several times a month for daily Mass at the Dominican Priory about 15 mins from my home. I was there tonight. It can be a little confusing sometimes, especially when the East and West are on different calendars for Pascha which we usually are. But at this time I’m still happy to have the ability to have frequent communal worship in the Latin Church even though it is clearly different from our Eastern services and our Eastern theology and mindset.

I hope that helps clarify. Again, it is not at all unusual for Eastern Catholics to go to Orthodox churches. I’m very grateful for these Orthodox who have graciously been a home-away-from-home for me. I’m rarely there for Divine Liturgy (ie a liturgy with Holy Eucharist) but sometimes I am. Usually I and others are there for festal Vespers etc., or the services of Great Lent.

 

[steve_b]

I’m puzzled why you consider them grumpy?

After many conversations over the years on this forum, on the following items you listed as EO grievences against Catholics, it’s the first word that popped into my head

:
Originally Posted by gurneyhalleck1 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Well the Orthodox cannot negotiate with Rome on the terms that Rome has set forth. The Orthodox could’ve lived side by side with Catholics and the filioque and leavened bread and all the other things, the Anselmian thinking, etc. But what the Orthodox will not put up with is papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction papal claims. With the papal understanding of the papacy itself and the Catholic views on councils and dogma and seeing Orthodoxy as “the other lung,” reunion is impossible. The Orthodox would require the Catholics to renounce the centerpiece of their modern image of what the Church is, papal infallibility and papal supremacy. They would be required to admit that, for the last 150 years or so that their claims of a monarchical model of the papacy are wrong and come home to Orthodoxy. That will never happen…

you realize there is a Catholic answer to all this…right?
g:

So I’m not so sure Orthodox are stubborn and not loving to Catholics, they just aren’t willing to meet on the terms Catholics expect.

Were you aware JPII apoligised to the Orthodox for Catholic offenses in the past? Did the Orthodox reciprocate, i.e. apologise for Orthodox offenses against Catholics in the past? You do realize, in this history, it took 2 to tango?

Check out this post from last year. Look at the NY Times links at the end.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7392935&postcount=304

Just in case you want a quick reference to the NY Times article.
nytimes.com/2001/05/05/world/in-athens-pope-seeks-to-mend-an-ancient-rift.html
g:

There were five patriarchates. One left the other three.

Is that what they told you?
g:

The other four continued onward…Since the Roman Church separated itself from Orthodoxy it has adopted ideas they find ahistorical without precedent and flat out wrong. They don’t believe in papal infallibility and supremacy, scholasticism, the filioque, and many Western ways of looking at spirituality. That’s not grumpiness, it’s an unwillingness to bend to fit Rome. It’s almost humorous that Rome would expect them, after 2,000 years, to bend to innovation and accept an idea that the Church never expressed until the 1800’s…papal infallibility? As I’ve studied Orthodoxy, I see a religion that is in many ways radically different from Catholicism.

c’mon g, think critically. Look at Eastern Catholics. They have their own canon law, their own liturgy, their own spirituality, married priests, etc. They are fully Catholic because they are in union with the pope. All rites in the Catholic Church have equal dignity. No ONE rite is more dignified than the other.

So this thread doesn’t get too far off track, we can handle these issues on another thread.
g:

Catholics continue to look at everything through the lens of their own theology thinking that Orthodoxy is bound to sooner or later ‘come to its senses’ when they don’t realize that the East has no intention of altering their spirituality just for the sake of reunion.

The lung analogy is a Rome-centric viewpoint. It may sound charitable to Roman Catholics but for Orthodox it implies that something is lacking in Orthodoxy that requires reunion to be fullfilled. Orthodox feel they’ve been firing on all thrusters breathing with both lungs quite well since 1054…

If you don’t like the lung analogy don’t use it. Forget about it.

Being seperated from the chair of Peter is a personal and corporate choice. It is NOT the plan of Jesus for such seperation. Re: Patriarchates in the East and firing on all cylinders, howz Constantinople the “NEW Rome” seat of the Byzantine empire, doing? It couldn’t even retain it’s name. Do you know who is the largest Christian group in Istanbul where a majority of Christians in Turkey, live? Catholics, NOT Orthodox. Howz Alexandria doing? Antioch? Jerusalem?

The Russian Orthodox are the largest of ALL the Orthodox churches put together. Most of THEM are inside Russia. How are THEY doing?
g:

I think it’s a real miscalculation Catholics make assuming that all this ordinariate stuff in Anglicanism is somehow a sign of things to come with Eastern Orthodoxy? Anglicans are cut from the same mold as Catholics in so many of their views and approaches to the Christian experience. Orthodoxy is not of that mold and an ordinariate scenario is just totally unrealistic for most Orthodox I would think…

in Bp Wares book, “Orthodox Church” have you gotten to the section titled “Church under Islam”? Education as he said suffered as a result of Muslim rule over Orthodoxy. THAT’'s where anti scholasticism came from within Orthodoxy. For the Orthodox to get an education, they had to leave the East and come West. There the Orthodox studied under Catholic AND Protestant schools. Tell me, if Orthodoxy is soooooo pure, why would ANY Orthodox study under the Protestants? And what did they take home with them as a result of Protestant teaching?

But we’re WAY off track.

 

[TrueLight]

Great and Holy Saturday

afternoon, vesperal Divine Liturgy and in the evening Reading of Acts followed by Matins and Pascal Vigil beginning at midnight and then Agape meal after Liturgy, around 3:00AM. We got home at 5:30AM this Pascha.

That sounds awesome honestly.

Do Eastern Catholics have vespers on Saturdays?

I’m rarely there for Divine Liturgy (ie a liturgy with Holy Eucharist) but sometimes I am.

So then I take it you don’t receive communion at Divine Liturgy?

I’d like to visit an Eastern Catholic service soon.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

I might suggest that perhaps the Orthodox you run into in life may be less “grumpy” if they were treated more politely. Rude jokes about another’s faith is not something usually looked upon kindly.

Yeah, I heard my share of rude jokes from ROCOR’s part. I can’t generally speak for the whole of Orthodoxy, but ROCOR and to a lesser extent the Romanian Orthodox Church are the ones I’m familiar with. When I first started dating a Russian Orthodox woman, I had all warm and fuzzy feelings towards the Orthodox. All I knew at that time was that our Pope John Paul II regarded improving relations and eventual reunion with the Orthodox a priority. I mistakenly thought the feelings of benevolence and friendship were reciprocal. I couldn’t have been more mistaken!

When I visited ROCOR, and we engaged with the ROCOR priest in a discussion about the Eucharist, he didn’t simply question the validity of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church - he mocked it! He was talking about us Catholics drinking the wine from our plastic cups and throwing the partly used cups into the trash bin. This was of course inaccurate, since we Catholics don’t do that (he probably confused us with some Protestant denomination), but he brought up that example, laughing at how we Catholics treat our “Eucharist”. Later I gave this priest a book about Eucharistic miracles in the Catholic Church, but I’m not sure he read the book, since he didn’t address it.

Also, the same ROCOR priest gave me a printout of an article from the orthodoxinfo.com website, one that mocked our saints, specifically St. Catherine of Siena, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa of Avila, and St. Therese Lisieux. The thrust of the article was that St. Francis’ stigmata were caused by self-hypnosis, and the female saints mentioned were a bunch of lunatics deluded by Satan who were engaged in never-ending “flirting” with the Divinity and mistook the pranks of Satan for “Jesus” appearing to them. And it wasn’t simply what the article was saying, it was how it was saying it. The article was the transcript of the lecture an Orthodox theologian gave at a Russian EO Seminary, and it was flat out mocking our Catholic saints.

So, I came to learn that the warm fuzzy feelings go only one way - from the Catholic to the Orthodox party, as far as ROCOR was concerned.

Now, regarding grumpiness, here’s something interesting I learned about the story of the Holy Icon of Kazan. The Icon was put on public auction in the USA. The Russian community failed to raise the money to buy it. When they failed, a Catholic Fatima organization raised the money, and purchased the Holy Icon for $ 3 M, so that it wouldn’t fall into secular hands, so that it wouldn’t end up in a secular arts gallery. Then, the Fatima organization gave the Icon of Kazan to Pope John Paul II, who in turn made plans to return the Holy Icon to the Russian people, as a gift from us Catholics. However, the Metropolitan of Smolensk Kirill, who is now the Moscow Patriarch, asked the Interpol in February 2002 to “seize the Icon from the Papal apartments with whatever means necessary”. Congratulations, Metropolitan Kirill! :clapping:

Well, the Pope did nothing wrong, he received this Holy Icon from the Fatima organization that lawfully purchased it. The Interpol did nothing to seize the Icon. Finally, the Pope John Paul II sent one of his Cardinals to Russia in August 2004, with the Holy Icon of Kazan. The Russian Church sort-of said thank you, noting that the Icon was not the original anyway. Well, why did Metropolitan Kirill ask the Interpol two years before to seize the Icon, if it wasn’t the original? Then, the Russian EOC took the Holy Icon back, and put it in a place of honor in the newly erected Cathedral of Kazan. This Icon is the same Icon that was previously venerated in St. Petersburg, before it disappeared in the early 20th century, the most highly venerated and miraculous Holy Icon of Russian Orthodoxy.

The Catholics purchased it when the Russian community failed to do so. The Catholics saved the Russian people’s most venerated Holy Icon of Kazan from falling into secular hands. The Pope returned the Icon to the Russian people. Did the Catholics, did the Pope receive a sign of friendship, for their efforts? Nope. What they received, was Metropolitan Kirill asking the Interpol to seize the Holy Icon from the Pope’s apartment. There was a half-hearted thank you when the Icon was sent to Russia, qualified by the comment that it’s not the original Icon found by the girl Matrona after the Tartar invasions, anyway.

The Russians have a chip on their shoulders, that’s for sure. I guess it’s because we Catholics attacked Constantinople in 1204.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

Here’s what the Catholic Church tells to Catholic believers: our laity should not visit Eastern Orthodox churches, and should not be involved in ecumenical relations with the EO, except as approved and supervised by our Bishops and Priests.

I learned this the hard way. I should have not been visiting that Russian Orthodox (ROCOR) church in the first place, because I failed to discuss my plans, and get my plans approved, by my Catholic priest.

Ecumenical relations with the EO are a mine field, and our Bishops are protecting us for a reason. We can get hurt, if we just start naively to visit the EO churches, without getting our priests’ and spiritual directors’ approval. Some EO laypeople and clergy will proselytize Catholics. We can put our eternal salvation into jeopardy, by mingling with people who will try to convert us away from the Catholic Church.

P.S. My mistake was partly based on what I knew about the Balamand Agreement of 1993, where representatives of the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Churches agreed not to proselytize each other’s faithful, but rather work for reconciliation and reunion of our Churches. I naively assumed all Orthodox were going to act accordingly. Well, ROCOR certainly rejected any talks and agreements whatsoever with the CC, and they were certainly quite determined to proselytize Catholics. I guess the same is true for the reunified ROCOR - Moscow Patriarchate. Catholics beware! They will try to lead you away from the Catholic Church.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Fascinating post, Joseph. Thanks. I hear what you’re saying. I do see some of the attitudes you describe coming from Orthodox circles. While I understand the Orthodox frustration with papal claims and the Roman worldview at times, they make little to no effort at ecumenical talks and at least cooperation and friendship toward each other. You are right about the Catholics trying to rescue the icon. I remember that story. The Orthodox Patriarch, Krill, you mentioned, pretty petty indeed.

I think Orthodox attitudes vary toward Catholicism. There is the overly-zealous-fresh-out-of-Catholicism type of Orthodox convert who has come to view Catholicism as the enemy and a threat. There is also the Orthodox convert who has a lot of love for his former Catholic life and is grateful to it for the formation of faith and devotion. But this is true of many converts. When I went over to the Catholic Church from Anglicanism, I was frustrated with Anglican stuff/issues, but I was grateful to them for the kindness, the faith, the pastoral care, and what I learned there. Many ex-Anglican-now-Catholics I’ve met at CAF have a real “throw Anglicanism off the bus” approach, a real anger toward it and desire to see it collapse. I’m just not of that mindset. So I share your frustration when you see a group that just hates the thought of ecumenical talks. But I also see that coming from Catholics toward Protestants to be fair.

It’s like a tier system, to be fair. The Orthodox don’t acknowledge the Catholics and cast a doubt/suspicion on Catholicism unsure if it is even valid at all…the Catholics do the same to Anglicans with great gusto claiming they’re “absolutely null and utterly void” etc. I think Catholics, when faced with Orthodox spurning their overtures, might learn how Anglicans feel honestly. It’s not a great feeling.

Would that all of us could find more common ground and stop such excessive ecclesiastical posturing and senses of superiority. We all think we’ve arrived at that Promised Land and want to try to convert others to the faith but we have radically different perspectives…sometimes I think the Lord must be so frustrated with ALL of us…

You make some great points in your post, Joseph. Thanks for it.

Also, the same ROCOR priest gave me a printout of an article from the orthodoxinfo.com website, one that mocked our saints, specifically St. Catherine of Siena, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa of Avila, and St. Therese Lisieux. The thrust of the article was that St. Francis’ stigmata were caused by self-hypnosis, and the female saints mentioned were a bunch of lunatics deluded by Satan who were engaged in never-ending “flirting” with the Divinity and mistook the pranks of Satan for “Jesus” appearing to them. And it wasn’t simply what the article was saying, it was how it was saying it. The article was the transcript of the lecture an Orthodox theologian gave at a Russian EO Seminary, and it was flat out mocking our Catholic saints.

So, I came to learn that the warm fuzzy feelings go only one way - from the Catholic to the Orthodox party, as far as ROCOR was concerned.

Now, regarding grumpiness, here’s something interesting I learned about the story of the Holy Icon of Kazan. The Icon was put on public auction in the USA. The Russian community failed to raise the money to buy it. When they failed, a Catholic Fatima organization raised the money, and purchased the Holy Icon for $ 3 M, so that it wouldn’t fall into secular hands, so that it wouldn’t end up in a secular arts gallery. Then, the Fatima organization gave the Icon of Kazan to Pope John Paul II, who in turn made plans to return the Holy Icon to the Russian people, as a gift from us Catholics. However, the Metropolitan of Smolensk Kirill, who is now the Moscow Patriarch, asked the Interpol in February 2002 to “seize the Icon from the Papal apartments with whatever means necessary”. Congratulations, Metropolitan Kirill! :clapping:

Well, the Pope did nothing wrong, he received this Holy Icon from the Fatima organization that lawfully purchased it. The Interpol did nothing to seize the Icon. Finally, the Pope John Paul II sent one of his Cardinals to Russia in August 2004, with the Holy Icon of Kazan. The Russian Church sort-of said thank you, noting that the Icon was not the original anyway. Well, why did Metropolitan Kirill ask the Interpol two years before to seize the Icon, if it wasn’t the original? Then, the Russian EOC took the Holy Icon back, and put it in a place of honor in the newly erected Cathedral of Kazan. This Icon is the same Icon that was previously venerated in St. Petersburg, before it disappeared in the early 20th century, the most highly venerated and miraculous Holy Icon of Russian Orthodoxy.

The Catholics purchased it when the Russian community failed to do so. The Catholics saved the Russian people’s most venerated Holy Icon of Kazan from falling into secular hands. The Pope returned the Icon to the Russian people. Did the Catholics, did the Pope receive a sign of friendship, for their efforts? Nope. What they received, was Metropolitan Kirill asking the Interpol to seize the Holy Icon from the Pope’s apartment. There was a half-hearted thank you when the Icon was sent to Russia, qualified by the comment that it’s not the original Icon found by the girl Matrona after the Tartar invasions, anyway.

The Russians have a chip on their shoulders, that’s for sure. I guess it’s because we Catholics attacked Constantinople in 1204.

 

[5Loaves]

That sounds awesome honestly.

Do Eastern Catholics have vespers on Saturdays?

An Eastern Catholic Church would have Sat, Vespers and there are parishes who do have them. My parish, again is very tiny and all commuters from a distance. Sometimes we have Vespers as a Reader Service with the deacon at the end of a Saturday work day. Mostly people from the parish who can will go to the Russian Orthodox Cathedrals for their Vespers. I’m across the bay and usually only go to those Vespers when I’ve been over there for a work day at our church. Our priest has been talking about maybe doing Orthros. Russians tend to do Orthros in the evening. Our priest comes into town and stays at the parish Sat. nights so that may end up being possible at least initially once or twice a month.

So then I take it you don’t receive communion at Divine Liturgy?

That’s right. It’s never bothered me in the least. I typically fast the same as if I were going to receive Eucharist when I go to their Divine Liturgy even though I know I will not be receiving. If it’s a day time Liturgy there will be a meal afterward. If it’s night time I bring something to eat on the 50 min drive home.

Russians have antidoron, the left over pieces of bread, blessed but not consecrated, from the prosphora used in the Liturgy of Preparation. This is available for people who have just communed, along with some wine with warm water to drink. Often someone coming from communion walking back to their place will give me a piece of antidoron. There are mixed teachings on that. Some places believe only Orthodox should have antidoron. Other places say it’s OK for non-Orthodox to have it but that they should have it only at the conclusion of Liturgy when one goes up for the priest’s blessing and again the antidoron is available. And other places there isn’t a restriction and “well meaning” faithful share it with folks like me. In my EC parish people usually give antidoron to someone who hasn’t gone up for Eucharist.

BTW, I go to one specific Russian Orthodox Parish for most of the services that I go to when my parish has none. I introduced myself to the priest the first time I went. I did ask the priest after I’d been going there for about 8 months if he would rather I left after the Liturgy of the Catechumens (Liturgy of the Word in the Latin Church), before the Liturgy of the Faithful (Liturgy of the Eucharist in the Latin Church) and he said “no”. I do think we are guests in these parishes and I always strive to be respectful. I also go there when I can on a work day to help out because I don’t want to only be “taking”, and leaving a check. I want to give of myself as well, for all that they have given me.

I’d like to visit an Eastern Catholic service soon.

Find-A-Parish → By Location Hope you can. They might have a Vespers Tues night 5/17 for Mid-Pentecost, and Tue. 5/31 for leave taking of Pascha and a Vigil Wed 6/1 for Ascension and the Ascension DL on Thursday.

 

[5Loaves]

Here’s what the Catholic Church tells to Catholic believers: our laity should not visit Eastern Orthodox churches, and should not be involved in ecumenical relations with the EO, except as approved and supervised by our Bishops and Priests.

I’ve never heard such a teaching. Can you refer me to a Church document that says this? I’m a catechist who went through three formal years of training in the Latin Church and have never encountered such teaching. As one can see from my posts, I and many in my parish are often in services in the local Eastern Orthodox Churches. This is well known to our priest. About 90 % of the books and CDs in our bookstore are Orthodox. Our priest took classes at an Orthodox Seminary. That is very common for Eastern Catholics as far as I know.

There is a very broad spectrum of attitudes towards us amongst the Orthodox. The Russian Orthodox parish I usually go to I went to initially at the recommendation of Fr. Maximos of of Holy Resurrection Romanian Catholic Monastery. He had visited there often when he was a graduate student here. I’ve met clergy and laity from a number of other Russian Orthodox parishes. The one which is relatively close by, 25 mins drive, I have no plans to visit because I don’t think I’d be comfortable there from the couple of conversations I had with the priest and the Matushka, I respect their beliefs about Catholics. If there were no other option for Liturgy I might change my mind and see if I could manage there.

 

[5Loaves]

P.S. My mistake was partly based on what I knew about the Balamand Agreement of 1993, where representatives of the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Churches agreed not to proselytize each other’s faithful, but rather work for reconciliation and reunion of our Churches. I naively assumed all Orthodox were going to act accordingly. Well, ROCOR certainly rejected any talks and agreements whatsoever with the CC, and they were certainly quite determined to proselytize Catholics. I guess the same is true for the reunified ROCOR - Moscow Patriarchate. Catholics beware! They will try to lead you away from the Catholic Church.

This Forum is filled with posts by Catholics who are aggressively telling Orthodox how wrong they are for not being Catholic. It appears exactly like proselytizing to me.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

I’ve never heard such a teaching. Can you refer me to a Church document that says this? I’m a catechist who went through three formal years of training in the Latin Church and have never encountered such teaching. As one can see from my posts, I and many in my parish are often in services in the local Eastern Orthodox Churches. This is well known to our priest. About 90 % of the books and CDs in our bookstore are Orthodox. Our priest took classes at an Orthodox Seminary. That is very common for Eastern Catholics as far as I know.

There is a very broad spectrum of attitudes towards us amongst the Orthodox. The Russian Orthodox parish I usually go to I went to initially at the recommendation of Fr. Maximos of of Holy Resurrection Romanian Catholic Monastery. He had visited there often when he was a graduate student here. I’ve met clergy and laity from a number of other Russian Orthodox parishes. The one which is relatively close by, 25 mins drive, I have no plans to visit because I don’t think I’d be comfortable there from the couple of conversations I had with the priest and the Matushka, I respect their beliefs about Catholics. If there were no other option for Liturgy I might change my mind and see if I could manage there.

5Loaves, first of all, that’s a fascinating video with Fr. Maximos you posted. I’m really envious of you folks in California, with all your Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox monasteries and churches. I would surely visit that Romanian EC monastery, if I could, and in fact I’m still fluent in Romanian language.

Regarding the question you asked, I think you are just fine if your Catholic priest knows and approves of you visiting EO churches. He probably monitors your situation and doesn’t think your soul is put in danger by your current involvement with EO.

When I did what I did, I acted really foolish and I was at a real danger of being talked out of the Catholic Church, since the particular brand of Eastern Orthodoxy I came in contact with at ROCOR was as virulently anti-Catholic and set on proselytizing people as one could get. They were not going to respect my Catholic identity, the Balamand Agreement, or anything like that. As far as they were concerned, Ecumenism was something coming from the devil, and they were there to convert and proselytize people, and make them EO.

Regarding particular Church documents, here are two, but I don’t pretend to be an expert. I just did a search and this is what I found - bolded emphasis mine in the quotes below:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/general-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930325_directory_en.html

DIRECTORY FOR THE APPLICATION OF
PRINCIPLES AND NORMS ON ECUMENISM

Quote:

Sharing in Sacramental Life, especially the Eucharist

a) Sharing in Sacramental Life with members of the various Eastern Churches

1. Between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Churches not in full communion with it, there is still a very close communion in matters of faith.125 Moreover, “through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches, the Church of God is built up and grows in stature” and “although separated from us, these Churches still possess true sacraments, above all—by apostolic succession—the priesthood and the Eucharist…”.126 This offers ecclesiological and sacramental grounds, according to the understanding of the Catholic Church, for **allowing and even encouraging some sharing in liturgical worship, even of the Eucharist, with these Churches, “given suitable circumstances and the approval of church authorities”.**127 It is recognized, however, that Eastern Churches, on the basis of their own ecclesiological understanding, may have more restrictive disciplines in this matter, which others should respect. Pastors should carefully instruct the faithful so that they will be clearly aware of the proper reasons for this kind of sharing in liturgical worship and of the variety of discipline which may exist in this connection.

1. Whenever necessity requires or a genuine spiritual advantage suggests, and provided that the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is lawful for any Catholic for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and anointing of the sick from a minister of an Eastern Church.128

1. Since practice differs between Catholics and Eastern Christians in the matter of frequent communion, confession before communion and the Eucharistic fast, care must be taken to avoid scandal and suspicion among Eastern Christians through Catholics not following the Eastern usage. A Catholic who legitimately wishes to communicate with Eastern Christians must respect the Eastern discipline as much as possible and refrain from communicating if that Church restricts sacramental communion to its own members to the exclusion of others.

1. Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and the anointing of the sick to members of the Eastern Churches, who ask for these sacraments of their own free will and are properly disposed.

In these particular cases also, due consideration should be given to the discipline of the Eastern Churches for their own faithful and any suggestion of proselytism should be avoided.129

continued…

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

…continued

catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=147

Encyclicals

Ut Unum Sint - On Commitment to Ecumenism
By Pope John Paul II

Quote:

Ecumenical dialogue

1. If prayer is the “soul” of ecumenical renewal and of the yearning for unity, it is the basis and support for everything the Council defines as “dialogue”. This definition is certainly not unrelated to today’s personalist way of thinking. The capacity for “dialogue” is rooted in the nature of the person and his dignity. As seen by philosophy, this approach is linked to the Christian truth concerning man as expressed by the Council: man is in fact “the only creature on earth which God willed for itself”; thus he cannot “fully find himself except through a sincere gift of himself”.51 Dialogue is an indispensable step along the path towards human self-realization, the self-realization both of each individual and of every human community. Although the concept of “dialogue” might appear to give priority to the cognitive dimension (dia-logos), all dialogue implies a global, existential dimension. It involves the human subject in his or her entirety; dialogue between communities involves in a particular way the subjectivity of each.

This truth about dialogue, so profoundly expressed by Pope Paul VI in his Encyclical Ecclesiam Suam,52 was also taken up by the Council in its teaching and ecumenical activity. Dialogue is not simply an exchange of ideas. In some way it is always an “exchange of gifts”.53

1. For this reason, the Council’s Decree on Ecumenism also emphasizes the importance of “every effort to eliminate words, judgments, and actions which do not respond to the condition of separated brethren with truth and fairness and so make mutual relations between them more difficult”.54 The Decree approaches the question from the standpoint of the Catholic Church and refers to the criteria which she must apply in relation to other Christians. In all this, however, reciprocity is required. To follow these criteria is a commitment of each of the parties which desire to enter into dialogue and it is a precondition for starting such dialogue. It is necessary to pass from antagonism and conflict to a situation where each party recognizes the other as a partner. When undertaking dialogue, each side must presuppose in the other a desire for reconciliation, for unity in truth. For this to happen, any display of mutual opposition must disappear. Only thus will dialogue help to overcome division and lead us closer to unity.

1. It can be said, with a sense of lively gratitude to the Spirit of Truth, that the Second Vatican Council was a blessed time, during which the bases for the Catholic Church’s participation in ecumenical dialogue were laid. At the same time, the presence of many observers from various Churches and Ecclesial Communities, their deep involvement in the events of the Council, the many meetings and the common prayer which the Council made possible, also helped bring about the conditions for dialogue with one another. During the Council, the representatives of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities experienced the readiness of the worldwide Catholic Episcopate, and in particular of the Apostolic See, to engage in dialogue.

Local structures of dialogue

1. The Church’s commitment to ecumenical dialogue, as it has clearly appeared since the Council, far from being the responsibility of the Apostolic See alone, is also the duty of individual local or particular Churches. Special commissions for fostering the ecumenical spirit and ecumenical activity have been set up by the Bishops’ Conferences and the Synods of the Eastern Catholic Churches. Suitable structures similar to these are operating in individual Dioceses. These initiatives are a sign of the widespread practical commitment of the Catholic Church to apply the Council’s guidelines on ecumenism: this is an essential aspect of the ecumenical movement.55 Dialogue has not only been undertaken; it has become an outright necessity, one of the Church’s priorities. As a result, the “methods” of dialogue have been improved, which in turn has helped the spirit of dialogue to grow. In this context mention has to be made in the first place of “dialogue between competent experts from different Churches and Communities. In their meetings, which are organized in a religious spirit, each explains the teaching of his Communion in greater depth and brings out clearly its distinctive features”.56 Moreover, it is useful for all the faithful to be familiar with the method which makes dialogue possible.

1. As the Council’s Declaration on Religious Freedom affirms: “Truth is to be sought after in a manner proper to the dignity of the human person and his social nature. The inquiry is to be free, carried on with the aid of teaching or instruction, communication, and dialogue. In the course of these, people explain to one another the truth they have discovered, or think they have discovered, in order thus to assist one another in the quest for truth. Moreover, as the truth is discovered, it is by a personal assent that individuals are to adhere to it”.57

Ecumenical dialogue is of essential importance. “Through such dialogue everyone gains a truer knowledge and more just appreciation of the teaching and religious life of both Communions. In addition, these Communions cooperate more closely in whatever projects a Christian conscience demands for the common good. They also come together for common prayer, where that is permitted. Finally, all are led to examine their own faithfulness to Christ’s will for the Church and, wherever necessary, undertake with vigour the tasks of renewal and reform”.58

 

[5Loaves]

5Loaves, first of all, that’s a fascinating video with Fr. Maximos you posted. I’m really envious of you folks in California, with all your Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox monasteries and churches. I would surely visit that Romanian EC monastery, if I could, and in fact I’m still fluent in Romanian language.

I would love to be able to visit the HRM monks in their monastery but it’s unlikely I ever will. I have a somewhat better chance of getting to the Monastery of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco which I do hope to get to some day.

Fr. Moses and Fr. Maximos were able to go to Romania last summer on their way home from the Orientale Lumen Conference in Constantinople. You might enjoy the photos they have posted from that visit.

I’m glad you liked that interview with Fr. Maximos. I think all the interviews Catherine Alexander did with Father Abbot Nicholas, Fr. Moses and Fr. Maximos are excellent.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Go to San Francisco first. And don’t forget to take in a Giants game, the city’s greatest treasure!

I would love to be able to visit the HRM monks in their monastery but it’s unlikely I ever will. I have a somewhat better chance of getting to the Monastery of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco which I do hope to get to some day.

Fr. Moses and Fr. Maximos were able to go to Romania last summer on their way home from the Orientale Lumen Conference in Constantinople. You might enjoy the photos they have posted from that visit.

I’m glad you liked that interview with Fr. Maximos. I think all the interviews Catherine Alexander did with Father Abbot Nicholas, Fr. Moses and Fr. Maximos are excellent.

 

[Hesychios]

…I would surely visit that Romanian EC monastery, if I could, and in fact I’m still fluent in Romanian language…

There is a good chance no one there will understand you.

 

[5Loaves]

Go to San Francisco first. And don’t forget to take in a Giants game, the city’s greatest treasure!

I can see SF from here, across the bay.

The Monastery of St. John of San Francisco is about 4 hours northo of us in Manton.

The incorrupt body of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco is here in SF in the beautiful Holy Virgin Cathedral.

The Giant’s do have a fantastic ball park now. I confess I’ve only seen it from McCovey Cove, and of course on TV.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I went to my first Eastern Orthodox Divine Liturgy today. It was quite a trip…

If you haven’t been to AT&T Park to see my mighty Giants play, that is a mortal, unforgivable sin so hurry up and go so as to not imperil your salvation!

I can see SF from here, across the bay.

The Monastery of St. John of San Francisco is about 4 hours northo of us in Manton.

The incorrupt body of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco is here in SF in the beautiful Holy Virgin Cathedral.

The Giant’s do have a fantastic ball park now. I confess I’ve only seen it from McCovey Cove, and of course on TV.

 

[dvdjs]

Regarding particular Church documents, here are two, but I don’t pretend to be an expert. I just did a search and this is what I found - bolded emphasis mine in the quotes below:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/general-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930325_directory_en.html

DIRECTORY FOR THE APPLICATION OF
PRINCIPLES AND NORMS ON ECUMENISM

Dear Joseph: In addition to the point that you highlighted, I think the one that I put inot boldface above is important: * provided the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided.*
There is more to the idea of nurturing a spiritual life than shopping, indifferently, for a parish that appeals to ones theological and/or liturgical tastes. Unfortunately, that practice is not uncommon, thought rarely recognized, in present times.

 

[PRmerger]

I have decided to check out some local Eastern Orthodox churches. One is a Russian Orthodox (ROCOR) and the other is a Greek Orthodox.

Which one should I check out first, coming as a newcomer?

You should find the Church that Christ established, and then conform your beliefs to that Church.

Church shopping–finding what church agrees with *your *theology–seems to me to be the backwards way of doing things, no?

Otherwise, aren’t we attempting to conform God to our image?