The Catholic Church: East and West

[Tom_of_Assisi]

mtr01:

Yes, the Pope is the Head of them all. As for the “confederation of Churches”, someone posted an explanation that made alot of sense. Think of it in a scriptural sense (especially from the Pauline letters): there was the church at Corinth, the Church at Ephesus, the Church at Collosae, the Church at Rome. All of these Churches comprised the Catholic Church and were under the authority of the Pope. It’s the same thing today. If you go to a Byzantine Catholic liturgy, for example, you will hear “let us pray for our holy ecumenical Pontiff John Paul II, Pope of Rome…” 4 times.

thanks

that makes a lot of sense.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Tom of Assisi:

Don’t get offended, Ed. Just the answers to my questions about your interesting post would be perfect–thanks.

I’m not offended, just asking for the courtesy of addressing me as the Church does (at least I’m not asking for my Eastern Catholic title of Father Deacon – which you will not Fr. Ambrose uses for me). I also do not ask for the use of my educational title (having an earned doctorate I am entitled to be called Deacon Doctor. I ask only that the title the Church has granted me be used.

You might want to call our “Church” the “Latin Rite” rather than the Roman Catholic Church since that phrase did originate as a slur. Even if many (Latin Rite) Catholics call themselves Roman Catholics–you, in your position as an example and teacher, should not be using it or encouraging others to use it–even if it is convenient for you. I’m sure we agree that accuracy should not be sacrificed for convenience.

But when accuracy clouds the message such that people do not understand it is no longer appropriate.

More questions:

So the other Catholic Churches are in communion with Rome, but do they recognize John Paul II’s ability to bind and loose aspects of their Church discipline? If the Pope (or Vatican III) decided to insist on celabacy for the priests of the Eastern Catholic Churches–would they be mindful of that decision–would they have to be?

If the pope were to insist on that he would be violating the directives of the Second Vatican Council which tells us to return to our authentic practices. Thus, the pope would not be likely to do that, nor, in fact, would he affect any of our practices that are traditional. He has, in fact, stepped in and issued orders to the various Churches. When Patrairch Maximos V was unable to exercise the day-to-day care of the Melkite Church the synod of Melkite bishops should have appointed an administrator. They didn’t, so the pope did – and we accepted it. The Code of Canon Laws for the Eastern Catholic Churches is another example of the pope’s authority being honored.

The president of the U.S. is not the govenor of any state–so your analogy does not seem to fit the situation with the many (23) Churches you are explaining here. In your first post you wrote that there are “22 (or 23)…Churches.” Sorry if I said 22 in my question. I now see from your response that there are indeed 23.

I agree – and made that point in a previous post.

Ed, if I were an Eastern Catholic, how would I view the Pope…how would his authority and relationship to me differ than it does to me as a Latin Rite Catholic?

Aside from commemorating him in the Liturgy most Eastern Catholics don’t even think of him. It’s probably very much akin to the Latin Rite Catholics who think of their priests and bishop more often. Although, at times like this where the health of the Holy Father is so questionable, we all think of him and pray for “his health and salvation.”

Thanks for the time and trouble. This is a very informative thread.Glad you like it.

–Tom (you don’t have to call me mister–even though I own a lot of property).

I address people as they sign their posts.

Deacon Ed

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

Deacon Ed:

You are precisely correct! Where the breakdown in this analogy occurs is in the authority that the Pope has over the other Churches. The President of the US cannot issue orders in a given state (the old issue of states rights still comes up from time to time) whereas the pope, in theory, could do just that. We have had Curial Congregations give orders to the Eastern Catholic Churches, however, and they do so under the authority of the pope.

Deacon Ed

This seems to answer part of my earlier question. So the Pope can bind/loose the “Church” discipline of the Eastern Catholics. How did the documents of Vatican II affect these Eastern Catholic Churches? Were there seperate rulings and determinations for those Churches? Can you give some examples from the last 50 years of the interplay between the Latin Rite and the Eastern Rite “Churches”?

How similar do you think the many Catholic Churches are to the different bishops in Europe and America?

–thanks again

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

Ed,

Which Catholic Church do you belong to?

Regarding the term “Roman Catholic” as a slur: I have several black students who call themselves the N word. They are cool with it, but I always stop them and explain that it is a disrespectful slur and they are degrading themselves…am I wrong? Maybe it’s just convenient for them. You don’t agree with the Anglican branch theory–yet you’ll use their term for the Latin Rite–which they use to support their theory. Think about it.

–Tom

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Tom of Assisi:

This seems to answer part of my earlier question. So the Pope can bind/loose the “Church” discipline of the Eastern Catholics. How did the documents of Vatican II affect these Eastern Catholic Churches? Were there seperate rulings and determinations for those Churches? Can you give some examples from the last 50 years of the interplay between the Latin Rite and the Eastern Rite “Churches”?

The primary effect of the Second Vatican Council was to affirm the value and legitimacy of the Eastern Catholic Churches. The second was the requirement that we remoive the Latinizations that had crept into our Churches and return to our authentic roots, including our Liturgies.

How similar do you think the many Catholic Churches are to the different bishops in Europe and America?

I’m not sure I understand what you are asking. The bishops should be the leaders of the “local church” (diocese/eparchy) over which they are the head and should do so in accordance with the specific nature of the Church to which they belong.

Deacon Ed

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

Deacon Ed:

I’m not offended, just asking for the courtesy of addressing me as the Church does (at least I’m not asking for my Eastern Catholic title of Father Deacon – which you will not Fr. Ambrose uses for me). I also do not ask for the use of my educational title (having an earned doctorate I am entitled to be called Deacon Doctor. I ask only that the title the Church has granted me be used.

Your humility on this internet forum is admirable. You could be a zoo keeper for all anyone knows or cares about here. The information you provide matters–not your title. Should I call the poster named “George Bush” Mr. President if he asks me?

Why would we call you Deacon Doctor? This is not your classroom–(you know that of course, but nice plug for your degree).

You seem really touchy about the courtesy of your TITLE, but then call all the Latin Rite Catholics–Roman Catholics because it’s convenient for you!!!

Well it’s convenient for me to call you Ed :tiphat:

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Tom of Assisi:

Which Catholic Church do you belong to?

I was born into the Latin Rite Church and was ordained in the Church. By the grace of God, Bishop Tod David Brown and Bishop JOHN (Elya) I serve the Melkite Catholic Church. So, I “belong”" to both.

Regarding the term “Roman Catholic” as a slur: I have several black students who call themselves the N word. They are cool with it, but I always stop them and explain that it is a disrespectful slur and they are degrading themselves…am I wrong? Maybe it’s just convenient for them. You don’t agree with the Anglican branch theory–yet you’ll use their term for the Latin Rite–which they use to support their theory. Think about it.

Actually, I use the term most Catholic Churches in the United States use. Most Catholics haven’t got a clue about the origin of the term, or that it was used to distinguish between the Catholics who followed the Pope in Rome (Papists was the term they used before) and the Anglican Catholics.

Communication works best when the symbols used (words) have an accepted meaning between the parties attempting the communication.

Deacon Ed

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Tom of Assisi:

Your humility on this internet forum is admirable. You could be a zoo keeper for all anyone knows or cares about here. The information you provide matters–not your title. Should I call the poster named “George Bush” Mr. President if he asks me?

But I’m not the president, and I don’t claim to be. I am a deacon, I use the title deacon because the Church has given it to me. I’m more than happy to provide my credentials to anyone who asks.

Why would we call you Deacon Doctor? This is not your classroom–(you know that of course, but nice plug for your degree).

There are some who do call me that – and when I was an adjunct profession some wag decided to use it to advertise a class I was teaching!

You seem really touchy about the courtesy of your TITLE, but then call all the Latin Rite Catholics–Roman Catholics because it’s convenient for you!!!

When you are willing to convince several thousand Catholic Churches to stop listing themselves in the phone book as “Roman Catholic” – to stop putting “Roman Catholic” on their signs you might have a point. Until then…

Deacon Ed

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Tom of Assisi,

Deacon Ed comes from an Eastern Catholic background that has a lot more respect for orders than many Western Catholics have. And they have a much more developed diaconate than we have in Western Catholicism. Some easterners even address deacons as “Father-deacons.” Please don’t think of Deacon Ed as someone from a foreign religion. He is every bit as Catholic as you or me.

Are we Latins so brash and disrespectful that we cannot give people in Holy Orders their due title? I wonder how you would address your local priest or bishop?

It is a respect Deacon Ed deserves not only because he humbly requested it, but because it is the right of every Catholic in Orders to be shown respect for their special calling. Mr. Bush does not even figure into the picture. Mr. Bush’s position is secular. The Church is a separate people, called out. We live in a foreign land, brother Tom.

God bless,
Greg

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Tom of Assisi,

You wrote: So the other Catholic Churches are in communion with Rome, but do they recognize John Paul II’s ability to bind and loose aspects of their Church discipline? If the Pope (or Vatican III) decided to insist on celabacy for the priests of the Eastern Catholic Churches–would they be mindful of that decision–would they have to be?

This is a thorny issue. I think the Pope’s DIVINELY ESTABLISHED role as the focal point of unity for the Church dictates that he must respect the disciplines of other Churches. I stress the words “divinely established” to indicate that the Pope is really and truly divinely commanded by God himself to respect the disciplines of other Churches because keeping the peace and unity of the Church is his pre-eminent divinely appointed duty.

God bless,
Greg

 

[Hesychios]

Tom of Assisi:

Don’t get offended, Ed.

–Tom (you don’t have to call me mister–even though I own a lot of property).

Tom, don’t get offended, but you sound like a jerk.

 

[Hesychios]

Sorry, I couldn’t help it.

+T+
Michael

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Father Deacon Ed,
I must say, your humility and patience with one so disrespectful is an inspriration. One that I hope to achive some day.
Tom of Assisi:

You seem really touchy about the courtesy of your TITLE, but then call all the Latin Rite Catholics–Roman Catholics because it’s convenient for you!!!

Very funny Tom, complaining about the use of the term Roman Catholic and then misuseing the term Rite. Rite speaks to a Church, not to an individual Catholic. A Cathollic does not belong to a Rite, a Church does.

The proper term is Latin Catholic Church, the accepted term is Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Not to do with any of the posts, but someone has renamed this thread to “The Catholic Church and Eastern Catholic Orthodox” – which makes no sense. The Orthodox are not part of the Catholic Church and Eastern Catholics are not part of the Orthodox Church. I’ve requested that the thread be renamed to the original name or to "The Catholic Church and Eastern Catholic Churches."Deacon Ed

 

[HagiaSophia]

Deacon Ed:

Not to do with any of the posts, but someone has renamed this thread to “The Catholic Church and Eastern Catholic Orthodox” – which makes no sense. The Orthodox are not part of the Catholic Church and Eastern Catholics are not part of the Orthodox Church. I’ve requested that the thread be renamed to the original name or to "The Catholic Church and Eastern Catholic Churches."Deacon Ed

You are quite right - and thank you for doing so - I’m confused enough all ready - I don’t need any extra help in that direction.

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

“and after Jesus finished speaking to them, the disciples argued amongst themselves over who was the greatest and who deserved the most honor.”

Mister Ed seems to be focused on his title, his education, his honor, and his Rite (excuse me–his Church).

Thanks for the info…but its back to Christ and His Church for me. Good luck in your efforts to spread the word about the real nature of the Catholic Church and how your Rite (Church I mean, of course) fits into it.

I guess something you have learned today is humility…and that people everywhere will not automatically bow down before your title. Not a wasted day at all for you. This lesson in reality and humility will profit you greatly in the future. Your fellow parishners should notice the improvement in your attitude right away.

Your humble fellow servant in Christ,

Tom

 

[Coptic]

Deacon Ed,

While we have deacons in my church, I am under the impression that your role as a deacon is not the same as in mine. Could you explain any differences for me?

God Bless,
Elizabeth

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Tom of Assisi,

I believe about 95% of the people on this thread are on Deacon Ed’s side on this one. Is it possible you need a little humility yourself? I seriously am not saying this as a knock, but isn’t your closing line rather ironic? Liberals are usually the ones who don’t respect the Holy Orders, prefer priests to wear secular attire, think deacons or priests have no special function other than to be happy community leaders, etc., etc., etc., in short, attitudes that rather mirror your own attitude right now towards Deacon Ed. Kinda funny, dontcha think?

There wasn’t a thing wrong with Deacon Ed’s request to you. Deacon Ed was not asking you to put him on a pedestal, but simply to show respect for the Holy Orders. What is not humble about that?

In fact, Deacon Ed, I would like to apologize to you personally for not noticing my fellow Latin Catholic’s disrespect much sooner. If I had been diligent enough to frequent this thread more often, you would not have been forced to defend the Holy Orders yourself, and thus expose yourself to such unjustified criticism about your humility as you have endured. I would certainly have jumped in sooner had I known so you wouldn’t have had to appear as if you were trying to promote yourself.

Please do not feel put off with some of the traditionalists here. I hope you will feel or continue to feel that this website belongs to you as much as it does to every Catholic out there.

God bless,

Greg

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

How do you change the title of a thread on the main page of topics?

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Fr Ambrose:

How do you change the title of a thread on the main page of topics?

As far as I can tell, only an administrator can change that title. Thus I’ve asked that they fix it for the choice of name clearly indicates a lack of understanding of both the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches! Or, perhaps, they have decided we’ve reunited without letting anyone know.

Deacon Ed