Why are there political divisions in the church?

[K2CDS]

After reading these posts on “Eastern”, “Western”, “Oriental”, “Orthodox”, etc. churches,
I can never understand why there should be political, yes political, divisions in the church.
Did not our God and Savior found one church and pray to the Father that all may be one?
Shades of egostism and selfishness!!!

 

[SyroMalankara]

After reading these posts on “Eastern”, “Western”, “Oriental”, “Orthodox”, etc. churches,
I can never understand why there should be political, yes political, divisions in the church.
Did not our God and Savior found one church and pray to the Father that all may be one?
Shades of egostism and selfishness!!!

The distinctions you mention are not political, but cultural and traditional - which is not necessarily bad, unless we refuse to be in communion (be One, as you put it). Unity in faith, not uniformity in practice.

 

[K2CDS]

Syromalankara:

If you think about it, cultural and traditional distinctions still fall within political divisions.
But, anyway, as long as we worship God the way He wants us to is really all that counts.

 

[Ghosty]

After reading these posts on “Eastern”, “Western”, “Oriental”, “Orthodox”, etc. churches,
I can never understand why there should be political, yes political, divisions in the church.
Did not our God and Savior found one church and pray to the Father that all may be one?
Shades of egostism and selfishness!!!

These are distinctions, not necessarily divisions. Speaking strictly of the Catholic Churches that fall into the categories above there is no division, merely a distinction of traditions, liturgical approaches, and jurisdictions. To use an analogy from within the Latin Church, there is no division between the Franciscans and Dominicans, because they are united in One Church; the same is the case with the Catholic Churches in general.

For what it’s worth, the Popes themselves have spoken of the need for the Catholic Church to embrace these distinctions, and for all Catholics to renew and revitalize our own traditions. A perfect example of this is Orientale Lumen. An even more significant document is Orientalium Ecclesiarum, from Vatican II.

When we speak of these traditions as distinct, we’re only doing what the Catholic Church itself tells us to do. It doesn’t mean that we seek to divide the Body of Christ in any way. On the contrary, we’re speaking only of the One Body of Christ, and Its many venerable organs.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Ghosty]

Syromalankara:

If you think about it, cultural and traditional distinctions still fall within political divisions.

Actually they don’t. The Melkite Church in the U.S.A., for example, falls into the same political division as the Latin Church in the U.S.A (the Melkite Church in other countries obviously falls into the divisions of those countries, just as the Latin Church does). The Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Churches fall into a single political division almost entirely (there being relatively few members of these two Churches outside of India, and the state of Kerala specifically), yet they represent distinct traditions. If the Maronite Church represents a political division, it is a division from non-Latins in union WITH Latins.

Some Churches arose out of political divisions, and a few may even still cling to them to a greater or lesser extent, but this fact doesn’t mean that the distinction of Churches and traditions is a political issue in and of itself.

Peace and God bless!

 

[K2CDS]

Ghosty:

That’s just it…the differences in culture, tradition, etc. fosters political divisions.
I thought that when the apostles all went evangelizing, especially St. Paul, they all set up one church with one tradition…It’s things like political power in the first place that caused the split between east and west, not the “filioque” as we’re led to believe. Although there may be a unity of faith, there really is no unity of belief. Eg: the Latin Church teaches and expounds the existence of Purgatory, many of the Eastern churches don’t. The Latin church teaches and expounds the rosary, many eastern churches don’t…and on and on.

PAX DEI

Shalom Eleichem

 

[K2CDS]

Ghosty:

P.S. Must we be like our Protestant brothers with their myriads of churches? Just the
Baptists alone have over 1000 different sects because of “cultural” and “traditional”
differences.

 

[The_Fool]

K2CDS, the divisions you note do become political divisions that must be overcome. I heard a number of our non-Latin brethren are concerned with how our Bishops conduct themselves and… their business. However, we are One in that we espouse the same beliefs. Who cares if they don’t encourage the rosary as we know it? Do you need the rosary to attain the prize of Heaven? No. So why should that matter between us? The Protestant movement spawned several different groups because they could not agree on what they considered important. All who are in full communion with the Bishop of Rome agree on truths they consider ultimately important.

Earlier you said cultural differences cause political differences. True, however we are the Church, and culture is not nearly as important to us as our faith. Now, there are people who let their culture screw that up, and it’s down right sad when that happens, but we are all one family, one Church. I guess it’s like when you have a bunch of siblings running around. One set starts snubbing the other set because of a stupid differences. However they are still related, still a family, and the offending parties need to be taught they are in the wrong.

I could be wrong though, but are you espousing the idea of a uniform culture throughout the entire Catholic Church? It sounds like you’re arguing that we should all be… well like you. That makes conversion really hard, and implies we need strict rules to dictate what is what otherwise we deviate.

 

[PJM]

=K2CDS;4987282]After reading these posts on “Eastern”, “Western”, “Oriental”, “Orthodox”, etc. churches,
I can never understand why there should be political, yes political, divisions in the church.
Did not our God and Savior found one church and pray to the Father that all may be one?
Shades of egostism and selfishness!!!

Why indeed!

Because from the time of Judas to the present day their are those who choose to misune the very Gifts that “make us God-like,” “in His Image.”

Freewill and intellect, are gifts from God, that hopes (expects) us to use for His Greater Glory and our Possible Sanctification.

Their has always been those who THINK that “they know more and know better” than God Himself and His appointed Pope.

Vatican II “mandates :nope::blushing:” are a current example. Dear God help us!

 

[K2CDS]

The Fool and PJM:

Thank you both for your answers. I am not trying to foster any further turmoil or cause any
rifts. It’s just that the human ego seems to transcend what God has proposed. Although we all share one faith, we each go our own way in our belief. I am not saying that you need the Rosary for salvation, or that you’re wrong in calling our Blessed Mother’s assumption into heaven “The Dormition” while the Latin church says “The Assumption”.
It is things like that that may confuse and confound those that are unfamiliar with the church…we seem like, as you say, siblings arguing over petty things and as to who is more right than the other.

Anyway, these for the moment, are just musings.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[The_Fool]

K2CDS,

I never took you to be a bringer of turmoil, but rather a sibling expressing their frustration at all our bickering. Human ego does tend to screw things up, but that just makes the reconciliation between us all the more sweeter. I also know you didn’t pose the rosary thing as an object of contention, but rather as an example. All we can do is educate ourselves about our faith and spread what truth we do know. It would help if things were simpler though, wouldn’t it? Even those within the Church are unfamiliar with it. I can point to a lot of people who would be surprised to hear that the Catholic Church is in communion with more than just Latin-ey people. Eastern Catholics? Oh, you mean the Orthodox or etc, that sort of thing. As long as somebody’s out there willing to put things right, there’s hope for the future.

 

[Patrick1982]

Their has always been those who THINK that “they know more and know better” than God Himself and His appointed Pope.

LOL! Ahhhhhhh if I don’t laugh I’ll cry…

 

[Volodymyr_988]

Syromalankara:

If you think about it, cultural and traditional distinctions still fall within political divisions.

No, they don’t. My parents vote Democrat and my wife and I vote usually Republican but we all have the same culture and traditions coming from the Midwest.

 

[K2CDS]

No, they don’t. My parents vote Democrat and my wife and I vote usually Republican but we all have the same culture and traditions coming from the Midwest.

We can start a political discussion here. I’m a Democrat but vote either Republican or
Conservative. But politics is not my intention. I was just curious as to why there are so
many different “churches” when we are all of one faith. I more or less have my answer,
so we’ll just end this bit of controversy here. God Bless you all.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichim

 

[mark_a]

After reading these posts on “Eastern”, “Western”, “Oriental”, “Orthodox”, etc. churches,
I can never understand why there should be political, yes political, divisions in the church.
Did not our God and Savior found one church and pray to the Father that all may be one?
Shades of egostism and selfishness!!!

That’s a good observation.

I’ll let you know how we should handle divisions in the Church as soon as I figure out how to handle them in my own family.

 

[Patrick1982]

After reading these posts on “Eastern”, “Western”, “Oriental”, “Orthodox”, etc. churches,
I can never understand why there should be political, yes political, divisions in the church.
Did not our God and Savior found one church and pray to the Father that all may be one?
Shades of egostism and selfishness!!!

Yeah, maybe if everyone was just Roman Catholic we could have real unity. It is “the mother and teacher of all rites” or some such thing isn’t it?

 

[Ghosty]

Ghosty:

That’s just it…the differences in culture, tradition, etc. fosters political divisions.
I thought that when the apostles all went evangelizing, especially St. Paul, they all set up one church with one tradition…It’s things like political power in the first place that caused the split between east and west, not the “filioque” as we’re led to believe. Although there may be a unity of faith, there really is no unity of belief. Eg: the Latin Church teaches and expounds the existence of Purgatory, many of the Eastern churches don’t. The Latin church teaches and expounds the rosary, many eastern churches don’t…and on and on.

PAX DEI

Shalom Eleichem

Did you read the Church documents I linked to?

Peace and God bless!

 

[Hesychios]

The distinctions you mention are not political, but cultural and traditional - which is not necessarily bad, unless we refuse to be in communion (be One, as you put it). Unity in faith, not uniformity in practice.

Quite so.

That’s just it…the differences in culture, tradition, etc. fosters political divisions.

That does happen., although in the past ages some people had the idea that there could be one worldwide state governed through a single monarch with a mandate from God. Uniformity was highly prized.

The “Divine Right of Kings” in other words, although ideally it would be no more than one king under God.

At various time it was thought the Byzantine emperor-successors of Constantine might be that one king. At other times it was thought Holy Roman emperors might be that one king, and eventually it was thought the Pope might be that (this is actually what Unam Sanctam is all about, a bold claim of political power).

What we have learned after all these years is that this ideal, of one worldwide Christian state and culture breeds intolerance from the center, and is ultimately unworkable. It actually encourages division by alienating fellow Christians.

Today we have discovered an appreciation of diversity once again.

This is appropriate because we know that the Faith spread far and wide long before it was legal to practice in any state, and the Faith very early on adapted to various cultures. What distinguished the early church was uniformity in belief, not uniformity in culture or practice.

I thought that when the apostles all went evangelizing, especially St. Paul, they all set up one church with one tradition…

I don’t think so. There was the Jerusalem church, and then others budded off as Christians circulated around the accessible world.

Saul/Paul in particular seemed to grasp this cultural problem.

He stated that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, which is true. But he also stood firmly for the Greeks not becoming Jews, that is not what oneness in Christ is all about. I think it is clear that the cultural background of the believer is not supposed to matter. One does not need to shed the culture, and the cultural expressions, when one ‘puts on Christ’.

Otherwise how could the whole world come to worship the God of the Jews…the One True God?

One needs to believe and act on/live those beliefs, not necessarily becoming Jews in the process.

…It’s things like political power in the first place that caused the split between east and west, not the “filioque” as we’re led to believe.

I disagree, unless you mean ecclesiastical political power in an ecclesiastical context.

Although there may be a unity of faith, there really is no unity of belief.

This looks like a contradiction in terms.

Eg: the Latin Church teaches and expounds the existence of Purgatory, many of the Eastern churches don’t.

It is my understanding (I could be wrong) that although some Eastern Catholic churches do not teach Purgatory they are not permitted to disbelieve it. They may not reject it.

The Latin church teaches and expounds the rosary, many eastern churches don’t…and on and on.

This is not a belief or doctrine, it is merely a devotion.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Hesychios,

That was, as usual, a great post. But please permit a clarification to the following portion:

It is my understanding (I could be wrong) that although some Eastern Catholic churches do not teach Purgatory they are not permitted to disbelieve it. They may not reject it. This is not a belief or doctrine, it is merely a devotion.

It is more than “not permitted to disbelieve it.” Every apostolic Church (EO, OO, ACOE, CC, PNCC, et al) teaches the DOGMATIC content of “Purgatory” - namely, 1) that there is a state after death that is neither “heaven” nor “hell” wherein purification/divinization of the soul occurs; 2) the prayers, suffrages, and sacrifices of the Church Militant, especially the Holy Sacrifice, is of spiritual benefit to those in that state. Not all use the name “Purgatory,” but the belief exists in all apostolic Churches.

The problem comes when members of one Tradition wishes to impose expressions and beliefs on “Purgatory” that are NOT dogmatic on members of other Traditions, or think that one’s own Tradition is “better” than others’.

Blessings,
Marduk