Why Catholic and not Orthodox?

[shawnbm]

As an Eastern Catholic, do you not have to submit to Rome?

It seems to me the question hinges on what “submit” means. Likewise, it appears as though Rome has a more “hands off” approach with Eastern Rite Churches in Communion with the Apostolic See than with those who (originally Latin Rite groups) have separated themselves from the See of Peter. In that the latter instance, it seems as though the Vatican exercises more direct authority since it is the historic Patriarch of the West. At any rate, although Rome could, in theory, interject in dire circumstances, it does appear that she does so reluctantly and only after being asked to by the Patriarchates of the East (in most cases) and that same would not change in a reunited Church in the future. Shalom to all.

 

[bpbasilphx]

\
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpbasilphx View Post
in an Eastern Catholic Church in communion with (not under) Rome.
As an Eastern Catholic, do you not have to submit to Rome? \

**Submission is WAY the wrong word to use.

I think we will get along better if we speak of reconciliation, rather than submission.

Even as an Orthodox, you have to “submit” to someone–your own bishop, synod, patriarchate, or whatever.

However, as far as I can see, the Eastern Catholic ecclesiology is the same as Orthodox–the Church as a communion of churches.

In my case, what has actually changed?

I’m saying the same prayers, believing the same things, keeping the same fasts.

I’m just not as bound up spiritually as I once was (which phrase can be taken any way you like).

The Pope has as much influence on how I live my daily life as did the Patriarchs of Moscow or Constantinople.**

 

[shawnbm]

I think many are saying the same thing. I do believe, however, that if a repeat of Arianism or some other heresy were to rear its ugly head, the Roman pontiff–even in a formally reunited Church–would have the final say over and above two or three other Patriarchs who agreed with the heretical one (hypothetically speaking), if the Patriarch in question did not use his authority to defrock such a heretic. That would be the final test–but it sounds like we are talking about things that probably would never come to pass. In fact, it is hard to think of an issue that would require such intervention other than extending Holy Orders to woman (deacon-priest-bishop) or viewing the Real Presence as a merely symbolic exercise.

 

[Mickey]

I’m saying the same prayers, believing the same things, keeping the same fasts.

Very interesting. It was the same thing for me as an Eastern Catholic–same prayers, fasts, Liturgy (more or less). Everything was Orthodox but they told me not to become Orthodox. I suppose I disobeyed.

The Latinizations and hence, the identity crisis, were evident to me.

I’m just not as bound up spiritually as I once was

Me neither! Once I went to Holy Orthodoxy, it was as if I was unbound!

 

[Ignatios]

Mickey and Ignatios, It has been a long time. As always, no response will be given without source material referenced. Give me a link and I will respond. Otherwise, I just have to assume you took these quotes from some crazy internet site that advocates aerial tollhouses.

Indeed it has been a long time, hope you doing fine.

The crazy internet site that I got this quote from is the same one that you got yours from, only that I read the whole thing.

Yours was from John 21:19, mine only 2 verses after, which it will be John 21:23, Here is the link that you posted : newadvent.org/fathers/240188.htm

As for the second quote of mine it is from one of the most respected sites:
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.iii.iii.ii.html

Not really sure what Ignatios and Mickey’s quotes are supposed to get at. The Pope today “yields” authority to local Bishop’s Conferences - that doesn’t mean he has lost any authority. All the bishops together in union with one another are in charge of the Church in the world.

Maybe the Pope yields when he can’t attend, but Peter yield when he was wrong after had been rebuked by Paul according to his Epistle to the Galatians.

And then, for the sake of argument, lets say it is what you have said, But then St Chrysostom said that Paul yield to the APOSTLES in Jerusalem, So by your understanding, Since Paul yield to the APOSTLES would that makes him the one with authority, or that they all are Equal with Peter and Paul both being the first among equals.

And last, every Bishop is in charge of his own local Church according to the Canons unless they are in an Ecumenical Council, then, they all decide together.

. – …What St Paul was disagreeing with was not St Peter’s teaching or beliefs, but his behaviour—he was, in fact, accusing him of being a hypocrite…

But the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians does not agree with you:

Galatians 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel,

for every council, the bishop who preside (or rule on the council) decides, collects and Judges the opinion of fellow bishops, but ultimately all their decision will have to be approved by a chief bishop…

In which case, James was the one who presided in that Council:

Acts 15: 19"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.

Plus add to the above what St Chrysostom had said about James as being the one in “high authority”.

GOD bless you all †††

 

[Abu]

bpbasilphx
The Pope has as much influence on how I live my daily life as did the Patriarchs of Moscow or Constantinople.

That’s the problem – we are free to do good and avoid evil, and Jesus has proivided us with the sureness of infallibility through His Church and in and through Peter and His successors.

It is precisely because of this lack of infallibility that there is no sure norm outside of the Catholic Church on many grave issues such as abortion, contraception, euthanasia, remarriage, capital punishment, IVF, cloning, marriage only between the opposite sex, and many other modern problems - this fact results in uncertainty and confusion.

It is precisely because of infallibility, that the Catechism of the Catholic Church can be issued by an Apostolic Constitution as a sure guide to faith and morals for the whole Church.

 

[Madaglan]

Very interesting. It was the same thing for me as an Eastern Catholic–same prayers, fasts, Liturgy (more or less). Everything was Orthodox but they told me not to become Orthodox. I suppose I disobeyed.

The Latinizations and hence, the identity crisis, were evident to me.
Me neither! Once I went to Holy Orthodoxy, it was as if I was unbound!

The identity crisis played a part for me, too, although I think it was more than the Latinizations.

 

[tdgesq]

Hey pal! Here is the source for the St Chrysostom quote that I posted: Chrysostom, on Genesis, Homily 24, Migne PG 53:211, Giles page 165.

Noted.
Ignatios;6193899:

The crazy internet site that I got this quote from is the same one that you got yours from, only that I read the whole thing.

Lol! No you didn’t! Otherwise you would have seen this:

So that even though John, though James, though Paul, though any other whatsoever, appears to perform any great deed after this, yet Peter excels them all, he that was the first to make way for their boldness, and open the entrance, and to enable them to enter with great confidence, like a river carried in mighty flood…Was he such after the Cross? Before the Cross, also, was he not more fervent than all? Was he not the mouth of the apostles? Did he not speak when all were silent, etc.

You guys just walk into these things. I mean, is it really always this easy? Please admit that Chrysostom states that Peter excels James, John and Paul, and that he is the mouth of the apostles and also the prince of the apostles. Thank you for your participation.

 

[Hesychios]

** … in an Eastern Catholic Church in communion with (not under) Rome.**

As an Eastern Catholic, do you not have to submit to Rome?

**Submission is WAY the wrong word to use.

I think we will get along better if we speak of reconciliation, rather than submission.

Even as an Orthodox, you have to “submit” to someone–your own bishop, synod, patriarchate, or whatever.

However, as far as I can see, the Eastern Catholic ecclesiology is the same as Orthodox–the Church as a communion of churches.

…

The Pope has as much influence on how I live my daily life as did the Patriarchs of Moscow or Constantinople.**

Now I am curious. As you correctly point out, Orthodox (of course) do submit to their bishop, synod and primate. So we are no strangers to religious authority placed over us. I imagine that you feel exactly the same way about your own bishop and patriarchate.

If as an Eastern Catholic you can state that you are not under Rome (as above) yet in communion with the Supreme Pontiff, can you state that you are in full agreement/disagreement with the following, or is it not applicable to your case?

Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both episcopal and immediate.

Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the church throughout the world.

So, then, if anyone says that the Roman pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema.

Most respectfully,

 

[5Loaves]

It is precisely because of this lack of infallibility that there is no sure norm outside of the Catholic Church on many grave issues such as abortion, contraception, euthanasia, remarriage, capital punishment, IVF, cloning, marriage only between the opposite sex, and many other modern problems - this fact results in uncertainty and confusion.

If you’re comparing Catholics with Orthodox here I’d disagree that the faithful in Orthodox parishes have any more uncertainty and confusion on these topics than Catholics do, at least in the US.

 

[Abu]

The key is that “there is no sure norm outside of the Catholic Church”, because only She teaches with the infallibility conferred by Christ. Confusion and uncertainty come from fallible teaching and picking and choosing.

 

[5Loaves]

If as an Eastern Catholic you can state that you are not under Rome (as above) yet in communion with the Supreme Pontiff, can you state that you are in full agreement/disagreement with the following, or is it not applicable to your case?

Most respectfully,

From the Orientalium Ecclesiarum the Decree on the Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite from the Second Vatican Council (I’m not keen on posting large quotes so use the link to read the whole section)

EASTERN RITE PATRIARCHS

1. By the most ancient tradition of the Church the patriarchs of the Eastern Churches are to be accorded special honor, seeing that each is set over his patriarchate as father and head.

This Sacred Council, therefore, determines that their rights and privileges should be re-established in accordance with the ancient tradition of each of the Churches and the decrees of the ecumenical councils.

The rights and privileges in question are those that obtained in the time of union between East and West; though they should be adapted somewhat to modern conditions.

The patriarchs with their synods are the highest authority for all business of the patriarchate, including the right of establishing new eparchies and of nominating bishops of their rite within the territorial bounds of the patriarchate, without prejudice to the inalienable right of the Roman Pontiff to intervene in individual cases.

 

[Hesychios]

From the Orientalium Ecclesiarum the Decree on the Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite from the Second Vatican Council (I’m not keen on posting large quotes so use the link to read the whole section)

Yes, it is informative to reread this after so many years but I think it does not really answer the question, thanks

My first thought, in reflection upon the emphasized wording (which follows) is that, taken at face value, this would seem to be an endorsement or inspiration for the Zoghby Initiative, more than ten years before it was actually first proposed (1975, then again in 1995).

How could the Vatican reject the concept after the Fathers of the church spoke so forcefully on it in Council? … or am I misreading this?

EASTERN RITE PATRIARCHS

1. By the most ancient tradition of the Church the patriarchs of the Eastern Churches are to be accorded special honor, seeing that each is set over his patriarchate as father and head.

This Sacred Council, therefore, determines that their rights and privileges should be re-established in accordance with the ancient tradition of each of the Churches and the decrees of the ecumenical councils.

The rights and privileges in question are those that obtained in the time of union between East and West; though they should be adapted somewhat to modern conditions.

The patriarchs with their synods are the highest authority for all business of the patriarchate, including the right of establishing new eparchies and of nominating bishops of their rite within the territorial bounds of the patriarchate, without prejudice to the inalienable right of the Roman Pontiff to intervene in individual cases.

The Melkite church in the United States is not within the bounds of the the patriarchate, so even these concessions are not in force.

As I understand it, it is the bishop of Rome, the Supreme Pontiff, which erects or establishes the dioceses and names the bishops for any church outside of the ‘territorial bounds’ which are, of course, delineated by the Supreme Pontiff himself (or his deputies in the Vatican curia).

It is interesting that this decree finds it’s inspiration in the earlier ecclesiology of the church, but does not replicate the earlier ecclesiology of the church. For instance, it does not place Latin dioceses and parishes under the local territorial Patriarchs, but allows the Latin Patriarch at Rome to control dioceses and parishes of other rites and churches in his territory.

So as I see it, for an Eastern Catholic to claim not to be under the Pope is an interesting assertion under any circumstance (worthy of a serious discussion here), but in a ‘non-territorial’ zone like North America it is amazing.

 

[Abu]

for an Eastern Catholic to claim not to be under the Pope is an interesting assertion under any circumstance (worthy of a serious discussion here

Interesting? Plainly due to ignorance or dissent.

 

[sidbrown]

This question is probably better answered by Catholics because I’m looking for the Catholic point of view. .

The Orthodox Church is a great Church and it has a lot of wonderful and beautiful people and clergy. However, there is more than one reason why I would remain Catholic and not convert to Orthodox. For one thing, the Orthodox do not believe in Purgatory. Even when you point out to them passages in Orthodox catechisms which indicate a state after death virutally indistinguishable from Purgatory, they will refuse to admit that it is Purgatory. To me, Purgatory makes a whole lot of sense, for many reasons. For one thing, if you have venial sins, you will not go to hell for these pecadillos. Eternal fire is too great of a punishment for a venial sin. Further, if you have committed a heinous crime and then have confessed, still, you will have to pay something because not everyone who says Lord, Lord will automatically get into heaven right away.

 

[5Loaves]

Michael-

So as I see it, for an Eastern Catholic to claim not to be under the Pope is an interesting assertion under any circumstance (worthy of a serious discussion here), but in a ‘non-territorial’ zone like North America it is amazing.

I haven’t read this thread closely enough to probably even be on the right wavelength , so that being said, I’m not sure if EC/OC folks have said “an Eastern Catholic … claim not to be under the Pope”, but rather what is the understanding of what “under” is and is not.

Maybe you’ll find it off topic because it’s not direct enough, but I would also suggest taking a listen to the interviews with Fr Maximos and Fr. Abbot Nicholas from Holy Resurrection Monestary. I like the entirety of them both, but at least beginning around minute 6:30 of “Who are Eastern Catholics?” Part 1 thru Part 2. If you click on “more info” by Catherine’s photo it opens up and tells exactly what questions she asks in each section of video. In the interview I linked to with Fr. Abbot Nicholas she asks questions that have some relationship to the topic certainly: 4. Do Eastern and Oriental Catholics have to affirm dogmas proclaimed by Rome? 5. Do Eastern and Oriental Catholics have to accept all Roman Catholic teachings and theology? 6. May Eastern and Oriental Catholics reject dogmas proclaimed by Rome as being outside their theological patrimony?

The Melkite church in the United States is not within the bounds of the the patriarchate, so even these concessions are not in force.

And we few Russian Byzantines have no patriarch.

Your friend in Christ- Mary

 

[5Loaves]

The Orthodox Church is a great Church and it has a lot of wonderful and beautiful people and clergy. However, there is more than one reason why I would remain Catholic and not convert to Orthodox. For one thing, the Orthodox do not believe in Purgatory. Even when you point out to them passages in Orthodox catechisms which indicate a state after death virutally indistinguishable from Purgatory, they will refuse to admit that it is Purgatory…

As Byzantine Catholics we’d have a similar understanding-- that the souls of those who have fallen asleep need more purification before entering into the presence of God and the prayers we pray for them are of value in that process. We don’t claim something more explicit beyond that, Purgatory isn’t within the tradition of ECCs.

 

[marlo]

because you have embraced sola scriptura of the protestants, read the Ecumenical council history.

I don’t see that part in the Acts of the Apostles.

 

[marlo]

An an Orthodox do you have to submit to your Patriarch?

As an Eastern Catholic, do you not have to submit to Rome?

 

[marlo]

identity crisis? you should ask the Russian Old believers to truly understand what identity crisis means, they are basically Orthodox before that was converted to Orthodox

The identity crisis played a part for me, too, although I think it was more than the Latinizations.