Why Eastern Catholicism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter trappy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

trappy

Guest
Hello,

I’m unable to discern whether Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy is the correct form of Christianity. I’ve done as much reading as I can on the schism and the issues surrounding it (filioque, unleavened bread, primacy/supremacy, IC, OS, ect). Much of it is beyond my “theological expertise”. I don’t find either side particularly convincing at this point, nor do I have the training to make that call.

Since this is an Eastern Catholicism sub-forum, I’m assuming at least some users were EO before EC.

Do you not believe there are “deal-breaking” differences between the Latin church and yours? Was there anything in particular that convinced you?

Cheers
 
I am Byzantine Catholic, but started out as a Latin. I also attended Orthodox parishes (when an Eastern Catholic parish was not available, and to understand what it means to be Orthodox). As a ByzCath, things are not as about doctrine, but about how the faith gets lived out. From what I experienced, Orthodoxy as it is lived is not really different than what i experienced in the Byzantine Catholic Church (Orthodox priests have even praise our orthopraxis). But when i get into the Divine Services, I find a richer and fuller expression of my Catholic faith that far exceeds anything I experienced as a Latin. In the Latin Church, doctrine, for the longest time, consisted of facts to be memorized (that attitude is beginning to be changed). But in Byzantine Christianity, the Faith is the language we speak, the song of our souls, and the poetry of our hearts. It is not facts, but forms us, our identity, and how we and and who we are.

As far as doctrine, at the risk of upsetting others, there is little real dissonance. Most of it is perceived, and rooted in misunderstanding. The theological legacy of St Thomas Aquinas (specifically his interpreters) have done much to damage and narrow the scope of Latin Theology. My opinion is that had the Franciscans lead the theological discussions at Florence, instead of being shut out, there would be no division today.

The real issue that separates the Churches is that of the role of the pope. I prayed about becoming Orthodox, but the Holy Spirit led me to stay with Peter. Thus I remain doggedly a Greek Catholic. Maybe it is my Catholic background, but I cannot read Jesus’ proclamation to Peter about the rock upon which the Church is built to be other than his person.

But whatever the path is, it must be done with prayer and discernment.

In Christ,
Adam
 
I am Byzantine Catholic, but started out as a Latin. I also attended Orthodox parishes (when an Eastern Catholic parish was not available, and to understand what it means to be Orthodox). As a ByzCath, things are not as about doctrine, but about how the faith gets lived out. From what I experienced, Orthodoxy as it is lived is not really different than what i experienced in the Byzantine Catholic Church (Orthodox priests have even praise our orthopraxis). But when i get into the Divine Services, I find a richer and fuller expression of my Catholic faith that far exceeds anything I experienced as a Latin. In the Latin Church, doctrine, for the longest time, consisted of facts to be memorized (that attitude is beginning to be changed). But in Byzantine Christianity, the Faith is the language we speak, the song of our souls, and the poetry of our hearts. It is not facts, but forms us, our identity, and how we and and who we are.

As far as doctrine, at the risk of upsetting others, there is little real dissonance. Most of it is perceived, and rooted in misunderstanding. The theological legacy of St Thomas Aquinas (specifically his interpreters) have done much to damage and narrow the scope of Latin Theology. My opinion is that had the Franciscans lead the theological discussions at Florence, instead of being shut out, there would be no division today.

The real issue that separates the Churches is that of the role of the pope. I prayed about becoming Orthodox, but the Holy Spirit led me to stay with Peter. Thus I remain doggedly a Greek Catholic. Maybe it is my Catholic background, but I cannot read Jesus’ proclamation to Peter about the rock upon which the Church is built to be other than his person.

But whatever the path is, it must be done with prayer and discernment.

In Christ,
Adam
I agree wholeheartedly! I cannot see how anyone can honestly read the New Testament and not see the Primacy of Peter. The other apostles ALWAYS deferred to him.
 
I agree wholeheartedly! I cannot see how anyone can honestly read the New Testament and not see the Primacy of Peter. The other apostles ALWAYS deferred to him.
You do realize that Orthodox do see the Primary of Peter? It’s papal supremacy that we object to.

Likewise, you should become Eastern Catholic if you believe that the papal claims are true. Otherwise, you should look to Orthodoxy (because you mentioned EO, I assume you are considering joining that particular communion).
 
Hello,

I’m unable to discern whether Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy is the correct form of Christianity. I’ve done as much reading as I can on the schism and the issues surrounding it (filioque, unleavened bread, primacy/supremacy, IC, OS, ect). Much of it is beyond my “theological expertise”. I don’t find either side particularly convincing at this point, nor do I have the training to make that call.
Just speaking for myself, this kind of not-knowing, or whatever we might call it, is a kind of answer in itself. What I mean is, I don’t believe in switching-sides without a strong compelling reason to do so. (Of course, that wouldn’t necessarily help in the case of people who are not already a member of either side, but personally I’m a cradle Catholic).
 
You do realize that Orthodox do see the Primary of Peter? It’s papal supremacy that we object to.

Likewise, you should become Eastern Catholic if you believe that the papal claims are true. Otherwise, you should look to Orthodoxy (because you mentioned EO, I assume you are considering joining that particular communion).
I am not the OP, but a convert to the Riman Churxh. I have an interest in Eastern spirituality because my brother is a Byzantine Catholic priest.
 
I agree wholeheartedly! I cannot see how anyone can honestly read the New Testament and not see the Primacy of Peter. The other apostles ALWAYS deferred to him.
Galatians 2:11

No Apostolic Christian rejects the primacy of Peter, but the superficial idea of Peter’s supremacy and the apostles’ absolute deference to him is unfounded. Anyway, there are plenty of these “convince me why EC is better than EO” threads and they’re all pretty pointless. Only personal research can resolve for the individual which one is better; leaving it up to chance individuals on the internet is convince you either way is to essentially say there is no difference in truth or value in which you join.
 
I’m unable to discern whether Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy is the correct form of Christianity. … Do you not believe there are “deal-breaking” differences between the Latin church and yours? Was there anything in particular that convinced you?
Is Catholicism the “correct form” of Christianity? Yes.
Is Orthodoxy the “correct form” of Christianity? Yes.

Think of both as two brothers born of the same mother, and who therefore share the same family heritage. The brothers have their different personalities, ways of doing things, ways of seeing things, temperaments, etc. And yes, they have their disagreements, as brothers often do. But they are nonetheless brothers in the same household. In this case, the household is the Church (big C).

For myself, a Greek Orthodox who chose to be received into the Greek Catholic Church (which is synonymous with Byzantine Catholic, or Eastern Catholic, etc.), my decision was based on two major factors: 1) language and culture issues, and 2) being enabled to more practically share the Gospel.

In my view, the Orthodox churches here in the United States aren’t very good at effectively sharing the Gospel (and here I emphasize effectively). In other countries and regions – such as in Greece, Russia, eastern and southeastern Europe, the Middle East, and so on – the Orthodox churches clearly have historical, cultural, and linguistic advantages, and thereby greater effectiveness at sharing the Gospel. Conversely, the Catholic churches have been far more effective here in the United States. In my experience, it can be boiled down to the fact that Catholics more easily integrate themselves into the cultures they evangelize, whereas the Orthodox churches tend to be more tightly encapsulated and become isolated bubbles that concentrate more on sustaining their mother culture (be it Greek, Russian, Slavic, Eastern Mediterranean, etc.) rather than integrating into the larger culture and thereby empowering themselves to share the Gospel more fully.

Where my own perspective and resulting decision was concerned, the Greek Orthodox Church – which I will always love – still remains largely captive to its cultural “Greekness,” and promotes it far more heavily than it should (and with an excess of pride that sometimes becomes disturbing). Don’t get me wrong. The preservation of cultural identity is important, and I particularly feel Greek culture, which includes the Greek language, is an immeasurable treasure that should never be lost. But the devotion to cultural “Greekness” has far too often gotten in the way of the priority of sharing the universal message of the Gospel, at least here in America. I’ve found this also to be the case in many other Orthodox communities, including the Antiochian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, etc.

There is also the issue of “Orthodox religious hubris” that still afflicts most Orthodox churches (the hierarchies in particular), whereby they still continue to snobbishly pound their chests as they proclaim the superiority of their theological and ecclesial “rightness” over and above all other Christian traditions, particularly the western Catholic tradition. This, in my own experience as an Orthodox Christian, is the number one impediment to achieving a return to full reunion and communion of both “brothers.” This isn’t to say the Catholic Church doesn’t have its own areas of hubris to improve upon. It certainly does. But the Orthodox Church remains far less conciliatory and far less charitable than the Catholic Church in terms of fostering a return to full unity. (This doesn’t even get into the issue of the infighting and fracturing that many Orthodox Churches continue to engage in.)

And so those two major factors – Orthodox cultural encapsulation and religious hubris – are what informed my decision to be received into the Greek Catholic Church. Albeit imperfect, it is a living demonstration of the “unity of East and West” that we all must pray for and seek to fully achieve. But it was ultimately a decision whose foremost objective was to be more fully enabled to effectively share the Gospel here in American society and culture. That is our primary mission as Christians.

So for you, you will have to decide accordingly as your own experience informs you, and as the Holy Spirit moves you. But in the end, it isn’t about any one “correct form” of Christianity, in terms of Catholic or Orthodox. We ultimately must be united to Christ and our mission, and as a result must choose our path in such away that most effectively enables us to bear the light of Christ and fulfill that mission within whatever broader culture we call home.
 
Is Catholicism the “correct form” of Christianity? Yes.
Is Orthodoxy the “correct form” of Christianity? Yes.

Think of both as two brothers born of the same mother, and who therefore share the same family heritage. The brothers have their different personalities, ways of doing things, ways of seeing things, temperaments, etc. And yes, they have their disagreements, as brothers often do. But they are nonetheless brothers in the same household. In this case, the household is the Church (big C).

For myself, a Greek Orthodox who chose to be received into the Greek Catholic Church (which is synonymous with Byzantine Catholic, or Eastern Catholic, etc.), my decision was based on two major factors: 1) language and culture issues, and 2) being enabled to more practically share the Gospel.

In my view, the Orthodox churches here in the United States aren’t very good at effectively sharing the Gospel (and here I emphasize effectively). In other countries and regions – such as in Greece, Russia, eastern and southeastern Europe, the Middle East, and so on – the Orthodox churches clearly have historical, cultural, and linguistic advantages, and thereby greater effectiveness at sharing the Gospel. Conversely, the Catholic churches have been far more effective here in the United States. In my experience, it can be boiled down to the fact that Catholics more easily integrate themselves into the cultures they evangelize, whereas the Orthodox churches tend to be more tightly encapsulated and become isolated bubbles that concentrate more on sustaining their mother culture (be it Greek, Russian, Slavic, Eastern Mediterranean, etc.) rather than integrating into the larger culture and thereby empowering themselves to share the Gospel more fully.

Where my own perspective and resulting decision was concerned, the Greek Orthodox Church – which I will always love – still remains largely captive to its cultural “Greekness,” and promotes it far more heavily than it should (and with an excess of pride that sometimes becomes disturbing). Don’t get me wrong. The preservation of cultural identity is important, and I particularly feel Greek culture, which includes the Greek language, is an immeasurable treasure that should never be lost. But the devotion to cultural “Greekness” has far too often gotten in the way of the priority of sharing the universal message of the Gospel, at least here in America. I’ve found this also to be the case in many other Orthodox communities, including the Antiochian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, etc.

There is also the issue of “Orthodox religious hubris” that still afflicts most Orthodox churches (the hierarchies in particular), whereby they still continue to snobbishly pound their chests as they proclaim the superiority of their theological and ecclesial “rightness” over and above all other Christian traditions, particularly the western Catholic tradition. This, in my own experience as an Orthodox Christian, is the number one impediment to achieving a return to full reunion and communion of both “brothers.” This isn’t to say the Catholic Church doesn’t have its own areas of hubris to improve upon. It certainly does. But the Orthodox Church remains far less conciliatory and far less charitable than the Catholic Church in terms of fostering a return to full unity. (This doesn’t even get into the issue of the infighting and fracturing that many Orthodox Churches continue to engage in.)

And so those two major factors – Orthodox cultural encapsulation and religious hubris – are what informed my decision to be received into the Greek Catholic Church. Albeit imperfect, it is a living demonstration of the “unity of East and West” that we all must pray for and seek to fully achieve. But it was ultimately a decision whose foremost objective was to be more fully enabled to effectively share the Gospel here in American society and culture. That is our primary mission as Christians.

So for you, you will have to decide accordingly as your own experience informs you, and as the Holy Spirit moves you. But in the end, it isn’t about any one “correct form” of Christianity, in terms of Catholic or Orthodox. We ultimately must be united to Christ and our mission, and as a result must choose our path in such away that most effectively enables us to bear the light of Christ and fulfill that mission within whatever broader culture we call home.
Hi JayNektarios. This may not be any of my business, but I don’t think you’re going to make too many friends among the Orthodox, given the ^^ condescension. :o
 
Hi JayNektarios. This may not be any of my business, but I don’t think you’re going to make too many friends among the Orthodox, given the ^^ condescension. :o
You may be right. 🙂 I can only speak from my own Orthodox experience, and as an Orthodox (and yes, albeit I am Eastern Catholic, I am nonetheless still Orthodox, no matter the retort of nay-sayers who might be inclined to “strain gnats and swallow camels”).

But I don’t feel my words are a condescension; they are simple facts borne of my experience. But, if my words can be interpreted as condescension, I would be reminded of Proverbs 27:5-6 (NRSV): “Better is open rebuke than hidden love. Well meant are the wounds a friend inflicts.”

And that, I would say, would best describe my motivations to any criticism I may employ, whether it is toward Orthodox or toward Catholics (and I certainly do not spare Catholics from my criticisms). I can only hope my Orthodox friends here would be charitable in their understanding of where I’m coming from. 🙂
 
You may be right. 🙂
Well thank you. 👍
But, if my words can be interpreted as condescension, I would be reminded of Proverbs 27:5-6 (NRSV): “Better is open rebuke than hidden love. Well meant are the wounds a friend inflicts.”
Hold on to your hat, because I agree. 🙂 Oddly enough, I was just recently defending someone (I forget who, but an Orthodox I believe) who said that we cannot just ignore differences and embrace a wispy washy we’re-all-really-the-same kind of ecumenism.
 
Keeping with the spirit of “Better is open rebuke than hidden love. Well meant are the wounds a friend inflicts,” I must say that I felt a bit of triumphalism coming from Jay’s post. You seem to suggest that you have left the problems of Orthodoxy behind while still retaining the title.

Forgive me, as I know you do not intend ill will, but it is this view, that, no matter how well-intentioned, serves to only further separate us. The vast majority of Orthodox do not see become EC as a valid move; when someone does move, insists that it’s valid, and then mocks us (which I’m not suggesting you’re doing, but I have certainly witnessed this from others), we can do little but feel a bit resentment.

Again, forgive me. This is, ultimately, my personal reaction to your beliefs, which, ultimately, doesn’t matter one iota.

EDIT: To be forward, I don’t think that someone who has joined the Roman Catholic communion can be considered Orthodox. Nevertheless, I respect your decision to still identify as one, even if I think it is ultimately detrimental to union (as I believe it confuses our differences).

You clearly have chosen Rome not over selfish reasons, but a desire to follow Christ and spread his word. For that you earn my respect, for what little it is worth. I can certainly understand why you see things the way you do.
 
A reflection … among Anglo-Catholics, there’s a (small) subset that describes themselves as “Anglo-Papalist”, and another (small) subset that describes themselves as “Anglo-Orthodox”.

That’s how I mean the phrase “Orthodox in communion with Rome”. Unfortunately, despite the fact that I make a point to always put it in quotes, and despite my explanations (e.g. the one that compares it with the phrase “home away from home”), I have discovered that many people (on all sides) tend to disregard the quotes and make it into an actual claim to be Orthodox.

That is why, after years of using “Orthodox in communion with Rome”, I have in the last few months decided on dropping it. It’s sad because many people who use that phrase (especially among those who did not just recently start using it after internet forums took off) completely respect the right of the Orthodox to be Orthodox, but I believe it’s necessary.

(Sorry for the digression. 😊 :o)
 
Thank you everyone for your responses.
Galatians 2:11

No Apostolic Christian rejects the primacy of Peter, but the superficial idea of Peter’s supremacy and the apostles’ absolute deference to him is unfounded. Anyway, there are plenty of these “convince me why EC is better than EO” threads and they’re all pretty pointless. Only personal research can resolve for the individual which one is better; leaving it up to chance individuals on the internet is convince you either way is to essentially say there is no difference in truth or value in which you join.
Ok, sorry if the question was a bit out of line. I’ve done a few months reading and don’t feel I’ve reached a satisfactory answer. I can’t read Greek or Latin, so I don’t feel confident making a decision either way. But, I think this question is of great importance, and not one someone can afford to be wrong on.
As far as doctrine, at the risk of upsetting others, there is little real dissonance. Most of it is perceived, and rooted in misunderstanding. The theological legacy of St Thomas Aquinas (specifically his interpreters) have done much to damage and narrow the scope of Latin Theology. My opinion is that had the Franciscans lead the theological discussions at Florence, instead of being shut out, there would be no division today.
Not to put you on the spot, but could you elaborate a little bit?
 
Thank you everyone for your responses.

Ok, sorry if the question was a bit out of line. I’ve done a few months reading and don’t feel I’ve reached a satisfactory answer. I can’t read Greek or Latin, so I don’t feel confident making a decision either way. But, I think this question is of great importance, and not one someone can afford to be wrong on.
It’s important to remember there is more to the Church than Greek and Latin - the Coptic, Syriac-Indian, Chaldean-Malabar, Ethiopian, and Armenian Traditions have much to add to the universality and catholicity of our Faith.
 
You seem to suggest that you have left the problems of Orthodoxy behind while still retaining the title. … it is this view, that, no matter how well-intentioned, serves to only further separate us. … The vast majority of Orthodox do not see become EC as a valid move.
I disagree on both those points.


  1. *]As a Greek Catholic, I am an Orthodox Christian in communion with the Bishop of Rome. And by “Orthodox” I refer not only to my Eastern faith heritage specifically (which Greek Catholics maintain theologically, liturgically, etc.), but also to the nature of my faith generally: it is orthodox (i.e., conforming to apostolic teaching) and it is catholic (i.e., belonging to the universal assembly of Christians who conform to apostolic teaching). In this way, all Catholics are orthodox. And all Orthodox, likewise, are catholic.

    *]It is important to recognize that while I am an Orthodox Christian in communion with the Bishop of Rome, I am not a Roman Catholic. I am a Greek Catholic, and as such I am part of a theological tradition that is distinct from the Latin tradition. Such differences, though, need not presume an absence of communion, but in fact magnify the richness of diversity that has always been an integral marker of catholicity.

    *]While I reject the blanket notion that I have “left the problems of Orthodoxy behind,” it would be more accurate to say that I acknowledged certain problems that I encountered within Orthodox churches here in the United States (I must stress: here in the United States), and that acknowledgment is what informed my decision to identify as Greek Catholic. The problems I encountered and acknowledged had nothing to do with any misgivings with Eastern Orthodoxy – again, my faith is Orthodox – but were related very specifically to my desire to most effectively share the Gospel in such a way that can be most optimally understood and grasped in the culture and society in which I live. And in my own determination, I can most effectively do so as a Greek Catholic in full communion with Roman Catholics.

    *]I am certainly not being triumphalistic.
    when someone does move, insists that it’s valid, and then mocks us … we can do little but feel a bit resentment.
    I have seen Roman and Eastern Catholics mock Eastern Orthodox folks, and Eastern Orthodox folks mock Roman and Eastern Catholics. It’s a shame, and it is also wrong no matter who engages in it. Are there differences between East and West? Yes indeed. I refer you to my remarks in point 2 above. Differences do not demand division. In fact, differences are necessary and natural contributors to unity. It is, in fact, the very nature of Creation itself.

    As for the validity of any one person’s move, it is not up to anyone to judge it, criticize it, or question it. The Church is the Church. It is an imperfect family. But it is one family (especially if we truly believe what we say when reciting the Creed at liturgy). If a Roman Catholic moves to Eastern Orthodox, so be it. If an Eastern Orthodox moves to Roman Catholic, so be it. I defer to the conscience of the Christian and to the Holy Spirit on such matters.

    And while a great majority of Eastern Orthodox would take exception to me saying that as a Greek Catholic I am an Orthodox Christian in communion with the Bishop of Rome, that is not my issue or my problem. Others do not have to like or accept how I define my Orthodox and Catholic faith, and I cannot and will not concern myself with seeking to persuade nay-sayers to accept it. The fact of the matter is: I am an Orthodox Christian in communion with the Bishop of Rome. My faith is Orthodox. My communion is Catholic.
 
You have certainly defended your right to call yourself both “Orthodox” and “in Communion with Rome.” And I do not think that anyone should need to defend their faith to their detractors.

However, I think that your views are ultimately detrimental to reunion. It’s clear that you aren’t going to budge on your stance, and while I find that commendable, I also find it needlessly obstinate. We clearly see the two Churches differently, so naturally, I’m going to take umbrage with your views.

At any rate, it would serve little to continue this discussion right now, given that this is not really my place to criticize how Eastern Catholics see themselves. My apologies.
 
JayNektarios, I just want to clarify that I’m not trying to make you change your thinking. I only ask that you respect the Orthodox enough to stop saying that you are Orthodox.

Thank you.
 
JayNektarios, I just want to clarify that I’m not trying to make you change your thinking. I only ask that you respect the Orthodox enough to stop saying that you are Orthodox.

Thank you.
I suppose this is ultimately what I am asking, as well, although I do not feel it is my place to ask (and yet I asked anyway. The internet. Go figure.).
 
However, I think that your views are ultimately detrimental to reunion.
FWIW (and meaning no offense) I don’t think Orthodox are too innocent in this matter either. Specifically, when Orthodox (though not you particularly) tell Eastern Catholics “You’re not really Eastern since you’re not Orthodox.” or words to that effect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top