I can understand the position (I once agreed with this third option of your description) but in fact being a member of an Eastern Catholic church does not represent the third option.
I understand.Oh, and Hesychios, this post was not directed at you in particular. I simply quoted your post in order to show some continuity with a line of discussion within this thread.
I agree completely here, Hesychios. I know such great modern luminaries as Fr. Lev Gillet (aka A Monk of the Eastern Church) firmly believed that Catholicism was not heterodox, even after they became Orthodox. I’ve also heard of Orthodox folks who became Catholic that maintained that Orthodoxy was far from heterodox. The fact is that neither Orthodoxy, or Catholicism, or Eastern Catholicism represent the experience of the Church of the first Millennium. As one theologian pointed out it is in the nature of Catholicism to be in union with Orthodoxy, and it is in the nature of Orthodoxy to be in union with Catholicism. To the extent that both sides have failed to maintain that communion, both sides have failed to be in continuity with the Church of the first Millennium.I can understand the position (I once agreed with this third option of your description) but in fact being a member of an Eastern Catholic church does not represent the third option.
The third option would be a replication of the first Millennium church, which Eastern Catholicism as it is constituted today does not represent.
Certainlly, there can be people who believe that neither church (being namely the Orthodox and the Latin Catholic) is heterodox, and to many it seems like the Eastern Catholic churches are the best option out of several poor fits, but it is not the answer to the dilemma.
I am not going to claim that there is a ‘better’ option right now, and I am not going to say that one should abandon option ‘C’ for some option ‘B’ or even a ‘D’. what I am saying is the better option for people who believe neither camp is completely heterodox has not appeared on this earth. It is a dream and a vision and perhaps, just perhaps, only exists in heaven.
The rest of us have to make do with what we’ve got.
I understand.
Why not wonder why any of us are Catholic? Why do any Eastern Catholics maintain communion with Rome? There are many reasons. Some of us persevere in the hope that we actually can live fully “Eastern” and “Orthodox” lives while maintaining communion with Rome; we believe that there is something to being within such a communion. Others remain in communion for cultural reasons. Others, for family. We ought not to question why our brothers and sisters remain in communion with Rome. Rather we ought to be cultivating a relationship of love with our brethren. Only then will all be drawn to Christ. “See how they love one another.”
Why should I fear for their souls? There is nothing I can do about. As Christ said, leave our troubles to Him. The only soul I can worry about is my own.
Why not? If people want to go to the Orthodox Church, who am I to stop them? I always pray to God to grant me the strength to be an instrument of His will. Why will I stop those whom he guided to Orthodoxy? If someone grows spiritually in the Orthodox Church than in the Catholic Church, why is that a bad thing? Around this forum you see many complain of the nominal Catholics in their parishes, yet if these same people find spiritual growth in Orthodoxy we should stop them?
Good stuff here …
The same can be said of traditionalists who advocate schismatic groups such as the SSPX.
In fairness, I suspect that if you confessed to an Orthodox priest the sin of joining the Orthodox Church, he would refuse you absolution and tell you to contemplate whether or not you were truly Orthodox before taking Communion again.
Sorry, I was deliberately being sarcastic there
I understand what you say, and I respect it.
It doesn’t matter what the sentiments of priests are. Some priest’s sentiments say we should ordain women, does that make it valid? What the Church teaches is what goes, regardless of what priests want to believe of not.
At the same time, I would imagine that it is also contrary to being Catholic to suggest that one might benefit from leaving the communion of the Catholic Church.
If being Catholic doesn’t help one’s soul, why not? Its a case to case basis. I’ve seen many people who experience zero spiritual growth in the Catholic Church. I can’t see how they can be saved in the state they are in. Ultimately we trust everything in the mercy of God. Some people eventually return to the Catholic Church years after, maybe they just needed that time away. Sometimes they do find God in the Orthodox Church. We Catholics believe after all that the Orthodox Eucharist is valid, so if Christ is there body, blood, soul and divinity, why do we think that the Orthodox are all condemned to hell by virtue of not being Catholic? It does not make sense.
Thing is, equal footing in what sense. When you have the 7 Sacraments instituted by Christ, you have the vessels of God’s grace necessary for salvation. What is more to ask for?
It can happen in many ways. I have been there, but slowly the spiritual growth is starting to come sort of alive again after nearly four months of being in a state of sickness.
When a bishop for example isn’t doing what is proper to him in his diocese, then the pope can step in as is proper to his office which covers the entire Church, to make immediate changes