The Apostolic Churches: Are ALL in possesion of Christ?

[Gregory_I]

THis really bothers me:

I am a traditionalist Catholic who loves the east to death. The minute I get an eastern church in my area, I am going. I accept all that is normative for the Catholic faith, including the uniqueness of the Catholic church in the midst of all other Churches.

Now, I know I posted something like this earlier, but I felt dismissed, and I need to deal with this:

What implications for our ecclesiology do we have to admi, given that all apostolic churches have valid sacraments according to both our and their OWN understanding?

Because think about this: We would not have a Copt come toa tridentine mass and receive under ordinary circumstances when he has his own parish available, lest he receive unworthily.
BUT WAIT! IS there a different Jesus in his valid sacraments at his own Parish? No. Are his views on the Catholic Church the same no matter where he communes? Yes.

Now the tricky part: Does he have the right to receive THE SELFSAME CHRIST at his own parish? We would say “of course Gregory, what a dumb question!” BUt it is NOT a dumb question if Christ is one! How does he do Christ less of a disservice by receiving him elsewhere?

That’s my negative view.

The Positive view is:
If the Coptic Parishoner does have an acknowledged spiritual RIGHT to receive Christ to the best of his ability in his own parish, AND CHRIST IS ONE, then if he receives worthily in his own parish, how does he receive unworthily in another, if Christ TRULY be present?

So, either our ecclesiology needs rethinking in light of acknowledging the presence of the holy spirit in the apostolic churches (for the sacraments cannot operate outside of the presence of the Holy Spirit) and maybe our definition of unity needs some kind of broadening, like somewhere between the branch theory and status quo intercommunion OR:

We need to return to our sacramental agnosia of former times: We are the Unique One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and God can do what he wants, but we see no reason to believe that sacraments are valid outside the Catholic church, and on the contrary, tradition teaches us that those who go int schism are dead, cut off, and have no life, only spiritual delusion.

Seeing as how that view will not be ressurected (most likely) how are we to understand ourselves as the One Holy Catholic and apostolic church when there are apparently other apostolic churches that are one (THey have unity in their communion) Holy (They can trace their physical apostolic succession to Christ and have valid sacraments which make man holy) Catholic (all the apostolic churches acknowledge their mission and mandate is to all people, even if in some cases it does not seem possible {i.e. ACOE}) and apostolic (They have valid apostolic succession, which is not difficult to demonstrate).

Either:

1. THere are multiple Churches of Christ that can trace their origin to him.
   or
2. THere is only one Church of Christ and the others are delusional.
   or
3. We need to broaden the term “Church” and ask ourselves if the current situation is ideal and work to incorporate more people under a bigger umbrella.

Lastly, and most intolerable to Christ himself: WE who war with one another, all partake of the same Christ!!! If we all posses the same sacraments…then how and the world can ANY of us partake of them rightly, seeing as how we all refuse do acknowledge one another as legitimate, yet somehow the most important part, the sacramental life, the heartbeats of these churches still thrive.

If these Churches are indeed in a REAL SPIRTUAL state of schism, they should be cut off from the life of Christ. But we do not say that! We say that each of their hearts beat! We say they are alive!

But if they live…are they not one with us? THose who are in true and contumacious schism cannot be members of the one body of Christ, they are dead members.

But these live! THerefore, how can they be in schism?
On the one hand, I say that there have been few schisms that anathematize official bodies, or churches in their official capacity, but there have been many schisms of one individual and another.

1054 did not start a great Schism. THose mutual and retaliatory excommunications were PERSONAL. The whole Byzantine east didn’t wake up the next day and find out their sacraments weren’t working! Neither did the west!

So Schisms that have their origin and AIM in individuals…can’t it be assumed that they are by their nature impermanent? They shouldn’t last beyond the lives of those involved, and if they do, it is only through the perpetuation of other people. But these can simply be misguided. We Chalcedonians now acknowledge the Christology of the NOn-Chalcedonnians as Orthodox! And we can read their writers! I have personally read St. Severus of Antioch, He’s just the echo of St. Cyril of ALexandria! He probably should not have anathematized Leo and Chalcedon, but the Christology taught is totally Orthodox, because it is ALL st. Cyril, the Doctor of the Incarnation!

So, all this time they were wrong until we realized they weren’t? No, we were both wrong, and were both stubborn and ungenerous and unfair in our treatment, one of the other. This is just an example.

SO, bottom line:
How can our church be unique when other apostolic churches apparently are given the holy spirit and have a full functioning sacramental life that actually helps the members attain holiness?
Why Shouldnb’t I go to a Coptic Orthodox Church and receive COmmunion if it suits me: Especially becasue HE does not change, wherever we find him: How Can the One GOd, received by all, and received worthily by some in all parties, be partisan?!

Help.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

snip
SO, bottom line:
How can our church be unique when other apostolic churches apparently are given the holy spirit and have a full functioning sacramental life that actually helps the members attain holiness?
Why Shouldnb’t I go to a Coptic Orthodox Church and receive COmmunion if it suits me: Especially becasue HE does not change, wherever we find him: How Can the One GOd, received by all, and received worthily by some in all parties, be partisan?!

Help.

Orthodox Churches maintain a valid Apostolic Succession of Bishops

 

[Ghosty]

You can go to a Coptic Orthodox parish and receive the Eucharist, objectively speaking. Subjectively speaking it would depend on whether they would allow you. The same goes for the Coptic Orthodox who attends a Roman Mass; he is absolutely allowed by the Catholic Church to receive Communion, though we counsel him to consider his own Church’s rules before doing so, we don’t forbid him from receiving.

In this case it has nothing to do with Christ’s presence in both places, but simply with obedience to one’s bishops. Objectively we have the right (though I don’t like the term right in this case) to receive Christ in both places, but subjectively there might be worldly rules that prevent it.

As for schism cutting off the Sacraments, we can still say that those who are guilty of schism don’t receive Grace, whether they be Catholic or Orthodox. That doesn’t mean that the Sacraments aren’t with the Schismatics, however. Indeed, the early Church determined that the Sacraments do indeed operate within Schismatic groups, but the people in them may not benefit from them. The real question then becomes who is guilty of schism; is the person who wants reconciliation and believes that we are the same in Christ just as culpable of schism as the one who hardens his heart and spreads misinformation about the other side? I think that obviously the former is not guilty of schism, while the latter is. The former, then, receives the Grace of the Sacraments, even in a “schismatic” Church, but the latter does not. Being schismatic is truly a sickness of the heart, not an external designation.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Gregory_I]

Dakota: THat’s my point. THe four marks of the church are present in all apostolic churches. SO, how can the Catholic church be unique amidst all these Sacramentally alive churches?

What makes the Catholic church unique if it is only misunderstanding, ignorance and misplaced bias that seperate us? and, if that is the basis of our separation (man made purely) then can we really have a spiritual rupture in our communion?

Either the Church is bigger than our current definitions, or narrower in scope. But not both.

So, wait Ghosty, since the Catholic church has the “Fullness” of the truth, does that mean can receive in any apostolic church, simply becasuse they have what we have, we just have more?

And, can’t a Church be thoroughly Catholic if the fullness of their teachings are Catholic, yet maybe they are silent, or simply do not teach any specific issue?

For example, I believe everything Copts teach is fully Catholic. But they do not teach purgatory, or indulgences, or papal supremacy: But f what they DO teach is fully Catholic, isn’t their teaching fully Catholic, although it may not teach all Catholic…things? I mean, as long as they don’t go out of their way to explicitly contradict Catholic teaching, or if they do, they qualify it in a way that is actually Catholic (like in their Christology)?

It just feels the Catholic church should somehow include all apostolic churches: It feels like we’re more like a feuding family (unfortunately) than actual strangers and aliens: But a family none the less.

PLease help me understand, because on the one hand GOd is active and evident in the apostolic churches, yet on the other hand he can only have one church, yet on the other hand all the apostolic churches meet the four marks of the church!

 

[Ghosty]

From the Catholic Church’s perspective you are indeed permitted to receive Communion in any Apostolic Church, but those particular Churches might not allow you to receive.

The Catholic Church refers to other Apostolic Churches as true Churches, but lacking in the full functioning of the Church (i.e. they lack the Petrine Primacy). Also none of them teach heresy, though might not teach everything the Catholic Church affirms, and usually even that is more a matter of semantics from the Catholic POV. This is why seminary training for Eastern Catholic Churches often utilizes Orthodox teaching materials, or even just plain takes place as Orthodox seminaries; there is nothing they will learn there that is contrary to the Faith, except perhaps polemics against certain Catholic teachings.

In short, from a Catholic perspective it is just a battle within the family, not seperate families, though certain members of the family are “living apart” for the time being. That is why the Eastern Orthodox were invited to participate at Vatican I (they declined); they were invited (and attended) as observers to Vatican II, and I think this was because the response the Vatican received for Vatican I led them to believe it would be considered presumptuous to invite the Eastern Orthodox as full participants.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Dakota: THat’s my point. THe four marks of the church are present in all apostolic churches. SO, how can the Catholic church be unique amidst all these Sacramentally alive churches?

What makes the Catholic church unique if it is only misunderstanding, ignorance and misplaced bias that seperate us? and, if that is the basis of our separation (man made purely) then can we really have a spiritual rupture in our communion?

Either the Church is bigger than our current definitions, or narrower in scope. But not both.

So, wait Ghosty, since the Catholic church has the “Fullness” of the truth, does that mean can receive in any apostolic church, simply becasuse they have what we have, we just have more?

And, can’t a Church be thoroughly Catholic if the fullness of their teachings are Catholic, yet maybe they are silent, or simply do not teach any specific issue?

For example, I believe everything Copts teach is fully Catholic. But they do not teach purgatory, or indulgences, or papal supremacy: But f what they DO teach is fully Catholic, isn’t their teaching fully Catholic, although it may not teach all Catholic…things? I mean, as long as they don’t go out of their way to explicitly contradict Catholic teaching, or if they do, they qualify it in a way that is actually Catholic (like in their Christology)?

It just feels the Catholic church should somehow include all apostolic churches: It feels like we’re more like a feuding family (unfortunately) than actual strangers and aliens: But a family none the less.

PLease help me understand, because on the one hand GOd is active and evident in the apostolic churches, yet on the other hand he can only have one church, yet on the other hand all the apostolic churches meet the four marks of the church!

The entire rupture is over the Primacy of Peter. If they acknowledge Petrine Primacy they return to fully communion

 

[Vico]

According to the teaching of the Magisterium, Catholic churches share three things:

1. common hierarchy
2. common sacraments/mysteries
3. common faith

The common hierarchy is significant, which includes communion with the Supreme Pontiff. I believe that Vatican I in 1870 was a great disappointment to the Eastern Orthodox because it defines the authority of the Supreme Pontiff in a different way than they accept.

We read in the 1928 Pope Pius XI encyclical Mortalium Animos of the need to accept, recognize, and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors:
11. Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors. Did not the ancestors of those who are now entangled in the errors of Photius and the reformers, obey the Bishop of Rome, the chief shepherd of souls? Alas their children left the home of their fathers, but it did not fall to the ground and perish for ever, for it was supported by God. Let them therefore return to their common Father, who, forgetting the insults previously heaped on the Apostolic See, will receive them in the most loving fashion. For if, as they continually state, they long to be united with Us and ours, why do they not hasten to enter the Church, “the Mother and mistress of all Christ’s faithful”?
vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19280106_mortalium-animos_en.html

 

[Vince1022]

The entire rupture is over the Primacy of Peter. If they acknowledge Petrine Primacy they return to fully communion

That’s not the entire cause of the schism, but it does seem to be the primary barrier to reunification (see John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint).

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Gregory,

It seems you are preaching to the choir. It is the Catholic Church who fully accepts the Orthodox Churches as sister Churches (the Syriac Orthodox and the Armenian Apostolic Churches likewise view the Catholic Church in the same way; not 100% sure about how the Church of the East views us, but I suspect it is similar with them; I am also not 100% sure about the Antiochian Orthodox, but I have some suspicions that they also view us as a sister Church, given their close relationship with the Melkites).

It seems what you say here may be better directed at those who do not accept the Catholic Churches as sister Churches.

Blessings,
Marduk

Dakota: THat’s my point. THe four marks of the church are present in all apostolic churches. SO, how can the Catholic church be unique amidst all these Sacramentally alive churches?

What makes the Catholic church unique if it is only misunderstanding, ignorance and misplaced bias that seperate us? and, if that is the basis of our separation (man made purely) then can we really have a spiritual rupture in our communion?

Either the Church is bigger than our current definitions, or narrower in scope. But not both.

So, wait Ghosty, since the Catholic church has the “Fullness” of the truth, does that mean can receive in any apostolic church, simply becasuse they have what we have, we just have more?

And, can’t a Church be thoroughly Catholic if the fullness of their teachings are Catholic, yet maybe they are silent, or simply do not teach any specific issue?

For example, I believe everything Copts teach is fully Catholic. But they do not teach purgatory, or indulgences, or papal supremacy: But f what they DO teach is fully Catholic, isn’t their teaching fully Catholic, although it may not teach all Catholic…things? I mean, as long as they don’t go out of their way to explicitly contradict Catholic teaching, or if they do, they qualify it in a way that is actually Catholic (like in their Christology)?

It just feels the Catholic church should somehow include all apostolic churches: It feels like we’re more like a feuding family (unfortunately) than actual strangers and aliens: But a family none the less.

PLease help me understand, because on the one hand GOd is active and evident in the apostolic churches, yet on the other hand he can only have one church, yet on the other hand all the apostolic churches meet the four marks of the church!