The Catholic Vs. The Orthodox Church: Which is the True Church?

[dzheremi]

Father Thomas Loya on his “Light of the East” radio program, broadcast #231 has an interesting discussion of the Eastern Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church in regard to individuals who feel compelled to leave the either the Eastern Catholic or Latin Church to join the Eastern Orthodox Church. I think it is a very fair discussion of the subject. He addresses why an individual might choose to make such a change.

byzantinecatholic.com/radio.htm for those who might be interested in listening.

Thank you so much for this link, JW55. I have listened to the broadcast in question and plan to listen to many more, as the priest who hosts these shows is obviously very knowledgable. One of the things I am struggling with is if I am meant to be in a different sui juris Church of the Catholic faith, and if so which one. My family does not really have any roots in any non-Latin form of Catholicism, let alone any form of Eastern or Oriental Orthodoxy (my grandparents on my father’s side, the last active Catholics before me, were from Mexico and Ireland, respectively), so in a way I am afraid of possibly “betraying my roots”, as silly as that sounds. Obviously, God comes FIRST before everything, but when there is no one around you from a non-Latin background, it can still seem like a huge idea to ponder. So I think it will be good for me to learn about the Byzantine and other Eastern Churches. So thank you for that.

Latin, Eastern, Catholic, Orthodox, Chalcedonian, non-Chalcedonian…trying to figure out how to best please God is so joyfully exhausting!

 

[ASimpleSinner]

What he actually did was challenge the longstanding monopoly of the Pope to name and elevate bishops. Why such a conservative bishop would find himself eventually doing so I cannot say for sure.

But he was no dummy. He was a well educated man, and longtime missionary, once head of the Holy Ghost Fathers or Spiritans.

Sorry, I simply can’t go along with the semi-polemic notion (especially when couched in terms such as “challenge the longstanding monopoly of the Pope to name and elevate bishops”… Abp. Lefevre was NOT - according to anything I can find or have read - interested in asserting perogatives as a bishop to supercede Papal authority or jurisdiction in episcopal appointments. While your point is subtle, I think it is couching his actions in a fashion well familiar to an Eastern non-Catholic, but well outside the mind of the late traditionalist bishop. NO, I cannot conclude from what he has written or the movement he served that he was making a special effort to support the perogatives of exisiting bishops to supercede the authority of their ruling hierarch.

And to answer the question:

Help me figure out how to understand the way the Catholic Church treated Archbishop Lefebvre and more importantly the why. Could anything similar happen in Orthodoxy?

YES.

Disobedience for the sake of preservation of tradition or in response to measures taken with which a particular bishop or subset of bishops disagree is not only utterly possible, it has in fact happened many times in just this last century.

 

[Hesychios]

Hello brother,

Sorry, I simply can’t go along with the semi-polemic notion (especially when couched in terms such as “challenge the longstanding monopoly of the Pope to name and elevate bishops”… Abp. Lefevre was NOT - according to anything I can find or have read - interested in asserting perogatives as a bishop to supercede Papal authority or jurisdiction in episcopal appointments. While your point is subtle, I think it is couching his actions in a fashion well familiar to an Eastern non-Catholic, but well outside the mind of the late traditionalist bishop. NO, I cannot conclude from what he has written or the movement he served that he was making a special effort to support the perogatives of exisiting bishops to supercede the authority of their ruling hierarch.

My point is this:

His back was against the wall. I tried to find the rationale he used for what he did, we both know that if things had gone to his liking from the start he would NEVER have broken with the Pope. We both know, as a Traditionalist Latin Catholic, he would not be championing Apostolic ecclesiology for it’s sake.

What he did, I am sure, was with a heavy heart. Believe me, I know fully well this man was no crypto-Orthodox. In fact, I have pointed out that this act of his would be considered an act of disobedience in the Orthodox church as well, if he were to break with his own synod.

I was trying to understand how he could possibly rationalize his disobedience, and the only thing I can come up with is that he knew that the Papal monopoly on consecrating bishops was a more recent innovation, and could be argued against in an emergency!

Sorry if you don’t like that. You are entitled to advance your own opinion.

Michael, that sinner

 

[Hesychios]

Latin, Eastern, Catholic, Orthodox, Chalcedonian, non-Chalcedonian…trying to figure out how to best please God is so joyfully exhausting!

I wouldn’t get too worked up over it. It’s not like a trip to the mall…or is it …just joking!

Thank our Loving God your eyes have opened! You have already been blessed.

Anyway, our cultural heritage and ancestry is of no consequence in this quest. Truth is not culturally based, the culture is called to Truth. But don’t expect to have all the answers based upon your intellectual inquiry, none of us are that smart. Don’t fret over a possible mistake at this point in your life…let the Spirit gradually lead you.



Baby-steps are justified. Take your time in deciding, learn to pray and then pray a lot…

As the old-timers used to say to me when I was an apprentice: “any move in the right direction is a good move”.

They also said “measure twice, cut once”.

God will not fault you for trying, I feel certain.

Michael

 

[JW55]

Thank you so much for this link, JW55. I have listened to the broadcast in question and plan to listen to many more, as the priest who hosts these shows is obviously very knowledgable. One of the things I am struggling with is if I am meant to be in a different sui juris Church of the Catholic faith, and if so which one. My family does not really have any roots in any non-Latin form of Catholicism, let alone any form of Eastern or Oriental Orthodoxy (my grandparents on my father’s side, the last active Catholics before me, were from Mexico and Ireland, respectively), so in a way I am afraid of possibly “betraying my roots”, as silly as that sounds. Obviously, God comes FIRST before everything, but when there is no one around you from a non-Latin background, it can still seem like a huge idea to ponder. So I think it will be good for me to learn about the Byzantine and other Eastern Churches. So thank you for that.

Latin, Eastern, Catholic, Orthodox, Chalcedonian, non-Chalcedonian…trying to figure out how to best please God is so joyfully exhausting!

Glad to hear you found the link helpful. If you are exploring Eastern Catholicism this Father Loya’s program is a very good source. Since I assume your are presently Roman Catholic and have concerns about family issues with changing your faith it might indeed be helpful for family members to understand that the Eastern Rites are of the Catholic faith. You can choose to attend their services as many times as you wish, receive communion and not be under obligation to make a formal change of rites unless you feel an inner call to do so. This may be some comfort to them The Eastern Rite churches may satisfy your desire for the pursuing an Orthodox form of worship without having to leave the Catholic faith, or you may find in time that conversion to Eastern Orthodox for you may be your calling. I would suggest you learn more about the eastern rite churches and try to attend, to get a first hand experience if this is a serious issue with you. If you haven’t done so already you may also want to find a Roman Catholic Church that offers a traditional Latin Mass and typically has a more conservative for of worship than the regular Catholic masses that most of us are accustomed to. Visiting an Eastern Orthodox Church for comparison may make your decision easier. There is a wealth of information online that can benefit you. In any case i would not rush into anything but give it time and see where you are lead. Best wishes to you.

 

[Hesychios]

…Since I assume your are presently Roman Catholic …

Oh, I had not realized our friend is already a Roman Catholic! I thought perhaps dzheremi was a protestant!

Still, we all can use a dose of spiritual renewal. My first advice to Roman Catholics is to try and bloom where they are planted.

 

[dzheremi]

Sorry if I didn’t make that clear enough in my post, Hesychios. I am a Latin Catholic who is somewhat confused and unsure right now.

It is interesting that your advice has changed in relation to that fact. Why? Not that it isn’t good advice. I am certainly not against trying to bloom where I am planted, as you’ve put it. I’m not going anywhere anytime soon, just trying to figure out what to do to deal with the questions and confusion I’m having, in the absence (so far) of any truly satisfying answers.

 

[SSTeacher]

Oh, I had not realized our friend is already a Roman Catholic! I thought perhaps dzheremi was a protestant!

Still, we all can use a dose of spiritual renewal. My first advice to Roman Catholics is to try and bloom where they are planted.

What’s your first advice to Evangelicals like me?

Acquisitively,
Mick

 

[Hesychios]

Sorry if I didn’t make that clear enough in my post, Hesychios. I am a Latin Catholic who is somewhat confused and unsure right now.

It is interesting that your advice has changed in relation to that fact. Why? Not that it isn’t good advice. I am certainly not against trying to bloom where I am planted, as you’ve put it. I’m not going anywhere anytime soon, just trying to figure out what to do to deal with the questions and confusion I’m having, in the absence (so far) of any truly satisfying answers.

It’s certainly not your fault I didn’t know. You made that clear enough in your profile.

Other around here can attest that I have always suggested that Roman Catholics try blooming where they are planted. The similarities (in theory if not always in fact) between our churches is such that I don’t see what harm there could possibly be in trying to make it work where you are. You can always draw upon the Spirituality of the Christian East, it is the heritage of all Catholics, although largely forgotten in the west.

Salvation is a process, it requires our cooperation with the Divine. That means (among other things) a rich prayer life, the sacraments, and inspiration.

You need to find a way to be spiritually fed. This should be possible for you right where you are. I would suggest finding a good monastery to stay at for a retreat or visit occasionally for Vespers. Even consider becoming a Benedictine oblate.

Take up the Liturgy of the Hours, don’t obsess over it, just pick it up and do it. Take the prayers you encounter to heart.

Try Eucharistic Adoration, try volunteering with the St Vincent DePaul Society!

Anything to nourish your soul, to heal you and to grow you as a Christian…

I think that for most Roman Catholics, there is a way, you have options. Pray first…then study.

If after all of that you still feel a need to move on then proceed with caution, always remember that God loves you and believe (as I do) that God will not fault you for pursuing Him with love…

 

[Hesychios]

What’s your first advice to Evangelicals like me?

Acquisitively,
Mick

Measure twice…cut once!

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Hesychios,

The “sin” of Archbishop LeFebvre is disobedience. He consecrated bishops without permission of the Pope!

What he actually did was challenge the longstanding monopoly of the Pope to name and elevate bishops. Why such a conservative bishop would find himself eventually doing so I cannot say for sure.

But he was no dummy. He was a well educated man, and longtime missionary, once head of the Holy Ghost Fathers or Spiritans.

If he received a proper Catholic education (and of course he did) he most certainly would know that the monopolizing of the naming and consecration of bishops in the hands of the bishop at Rome is NOT an Apostolic practice. He may have, by extension, rationalized that the Pope had no right to excommunicate him on that basis.

However, Archbishop Le Febvre himself did not constitute a synod. It is not as if he were isolated in some place like the Gulags or in the underground church of 17th century Japan where such unilateral action might be understood as necessary to save the church.

Well, perhaps he saw the church as in some sort of apostasy and actually believed he was saving the church through his actions.

I believe the one reason the Archbishop split, aside from the question of Liturgy (which I don’t think is a valid reason for schism in the first place), was his opposition to the ecumenical stance of Vatican 2. I don’t think he had any problems with the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. SSPX members constantly claim adherence to the traditional Catholic understanding of the papacy.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Hesychios]

Dear brother Hesychios,

I believe the one reason the Archbishop split, aside from the question of Liturgy (which I don’t think is a valid reason for schism in the first place), was his opposition to the ecumenical stance of Vatican 2. I don’t think he had any problems with the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church. SSPX members constantly claim adherence to the traditional Catholic understanding of the papacy.

Blessings,
Marduk

I tend to agree with you. He never would have wanted to challenge the traditional ecclesiology of the western church.

However, if he really was convinced of the correctness of the ecclesiology of the western church…he would never have consecrated those four bishops. He would have understood that, according the western ecclesiology, he had no inherent right to do so.

So there is something else going on here. I speculated upon how he could have rationalized his disobedience. It’s only a guess, and your guess would be (in this case) as good as mine. I am not a mind reader and neither are you.

Perhaps, in strictly adhering to the western ecclesiology, he made himself the Pope! But I tend to doubt that myself.

So then, if in the context of this thread you have any ideas about how a man who knows he can not do something (like ordain bishops), can rationalize doing it anyway, I am sure it would prove interesting.