Would You Join The Orthodox Church If?

[ASimpleSinner]

You ended up moving to an area where their were no Eastern Rite Catholic churches within a reasonable driving distance.

No.

Where I worship is not an accident or concession to liturgical or heritage sensibilities. Part of being “true to my Eastern Heritage” is maintaining communion with the See of Peter - as was the case in the first millenium. During the numerous schisms between East and West prior to the year 1000, reparation of communion was always sought.

Ummm…not necessarily…but there are differences. For instance, I don’t ever hear of indulgences or the treasury of merits in the Eastern Catholic churches…There is a difference between ideal belief and actual belief. I think many of the Easterners, including myself, are prone to the latter…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

TOM is a big kick for you lately Alexius, have you been to an RC parish where this has been much discussed?

 

[ebed_melech]

Just as a point of clarification, the OP asked if we would join the Orthodox Church if no Eastern Catholic parish was nearby.

I would only add to what I have said so far that, while I might attend Orthodox services and even, with the appropriate permissions secured, approach the Chalice, I would never renounce my full communion with the Catholic Church or with the Church of Rome.

To my mind there is a difference between attending an Orthodox parish, even participating in its common life and leaving full communion with the Catholic Church to join one of the Orthodox Churches.

In ICXC,

Gordo

 

[ASimpleSinner]

This could be reversed and said that if the ultramontanists didn’t wish to submit all eastern thought to western thought there would be no problems.

Such a simplification. Ultramontinist can be an easy and expedient epithet to be sure! To say “there would be no problems” were it not for the “ultramontanists” begs the question - how problem free are the Eastern Churches that look over no mountains?

 

[JuanCarlos]

trust me, i’m not saying eastern (or Western) rites are “expendable”. Quite the contrary. I think in most respects the Eastern churches are in better shape than the Latin rite- more reverence, less liturgical abuse, etc.

What I am saying is externals are absolutely secondary- given the choice between an extremely reverant SSPV Mass or a N.O. Mass that is in shambles I would attend the NO Mass, because it is still, at least, a member of the true Church and has not created schism.

 

[jimmy]

trust me, i’m not saying eastern (or Western) rites are “expendable”. Quite the contrary. I think in most respects the Eastern churches are in better shape than the Latin rite- more reverence, less liturgical abuse, etc.

What I am saying is externals are absolutely secondary- given the choice between an extremely reverant SSPV Mass or a N.O. Mass that is in shambles I would attend the NO Mass, because it is still, at least, a member of the true Church and has not created schism.

The eastern Catholics do not view the tradition as externals and consequently secondary. They view the liturgy as given from God. The byzantine view of the liturgy is that it was inspired by God, not that it is a creation of the Church. The eastern churches go deeper than just external traditions. They have a different perspective on the whole of their faith. This question of whether you would join the Orthodox Church goes deeper than a question of whether you follow certain external traditions. When we speak of our tradition we speak of the faith of the Church. We speak of the faith which we hold to.

 

[ebed_melech]

trust me, i’m not saying eastern (or Western) rites are “expendable”. Quite the contrary. I think in most respects the Eastern churches are in better shape than the Latin rite- more reverence, less liturgical abuse, etc.

What I am saying is externals are absolutely secondary- given the choice between an extremely reverant SSPV Mass or a N.O. Mass that is in shambles I would attend the NO Mass, because it is still, at least, a member of the true Church and has not created schism.

Juan,

I think you bring up an interesting point.

In my own case, were there no other alternative than a very poorly done decidedly illicit NO Mass (I’m not saying that all NO Masses are illicit, but there are some that are!) I would either take my family to an Orthodox Church nearby and/or get permission from my bishop to have reader services at my home and then get busy starting that Eastern Catholic mission!

But can it be said that the fulness of Catholic worship can be reduced simply to the hierarch who is commemorated in the liturgy? IOW, so long as the pope is commemorated, then that is all that matters?!? Or is there something that is even more critical, particularly for Sunday worship?

I think when you have a moral reason to skip Mass at a local NO parish (especially where attending would be a scandal to you or your family), you need to find alternate means to sanctify the day.

Now, that said, a moral reason is not “they don’t use incense”…I think it needs to rise to the level of something that is truly offensive, such as material heresy being preached regularly from the pulpit or serious liturgical abuses.

Interesting discussion, though.

God bless,

Gordo

 

[jimmy]

Such a simplification. Ultramontinist can be an easy and expedient epithet to be sure! To say “there would be no problems” were it not for the “ultramontanists” begs the question - how problem free are the Eastern Churches that look over no mountains?

Yes it is simplified but so is any accusation against the east of schism. And so is any accusation that if the east did not put so much emphasis on external rites there would be no problems.

 

[Alexius]

TOM is a big kick for you lately Alexius, have you been to an RC parish where this has been much discussed?

No, but I know the teaching is an official declaration of Rome. It has honestly bothered me for a while as to whether Easterners are to affirm this teaching…It seems absent to Eastern thought because our view of Grace and works are so different. Merely forgetting about it to seem in agreement doesn’t solve the problem. It seems that is what has happened with the Filioque. If that is the case, then we must say that the Catholic Church is divided.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Yes it is simplified but so is any accusation against the east of schism. And so is any accusation that if the east did not put so much emphasis on external rites there would be no problems.

So two over-simplifications make a…?

 

[jimmy]

So two over-simplifications make a…?

You should respond to a post as it is written. It was a response to a specific post that said there would be no problems if the byzantines did not make a big deal of rites and external traditions. My statement may have been oversimplified but that is the point.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

You should respond to a post as it is written. It was a response to a specific post that said there would be no problems if the byzantines did not make a big deal of rites and external traditions. My statement may have been oversimplified but that is the point.

I don’t see the clear correlation, but we are likely at another one of our impasses.

 

[ebed_melech]

No, but I know the teaching is an official declaration of Rome. It has honestly bothered me for a while as to whether Easterners are to affirm this teaching…It seems absent to Eastern thought because our view of Grace and works are so different. Merely forgetting about it to seem in agreement doesn’t solve the problem. It seems that is what has happened with the Filioque. If that is the case, then we must say that the Catholic Church is divided.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

Alexius,

What would an acknowledgement or even acceptance from the Catholic East look like to you?

Obviously our liturgical traditions reflect a fully Catholic way of worshipping and theologizing. Is there something that should be “added” that would somehow reflect a fuller Catholic unity? An Eastern Enchiridion of Indulgences, perhaps?

God bless,

Gordo

 

[Alexius]

Alexius,

What would an acknowledgement or even acceptance from the Catholic East look like to you?

Obviously our liturgical traditions reflect a fully Catholic way of worshipping and theologizing. Is there something that should be “added” that would somehow reflect a fuller Catholic unity? An Eastern Enchiridion of Indulgences, perhaps?

God bless,

Gordo

It would seem that an avoidance of it is not a sign of unity. If it is indeed foreign to the East, then it must be said that the Roman belief is wrong. As far as I know, indulgences are never mentioned. Are they accepted?

 

[dvdjs]

No, but I know the teaching is an official declaration of Rome. It has honestly bothered me for a while as to whether Easterners are to affirm this teaching…It seems absent to Eastern thought because our view of Grace and works are so different.

I would like to hear your ideas about the great difference between views of Grace and works in the RCC and UGCC.

Merely forgetting about it to seem in agreement doesn’t solve the problem. It seems that is what has happened with the Filioque. If that is the case, then we must say that the Catholic Church is divided.

First, why do you perceive a problem? What we must say is: “In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity”. Now, at the level of essentials, what, precisely, is the problem?

It would seem that an avoidance of it is not a sign of unity. If it is indeed foreign to the East, then it must be said that the Roman belief is wrong. As far as I know, indulgences are never mentioned. Are they accepted?

Again, your idea of unity is overly restrictive. And I would like to hear you explain your comment that a Roman idea unknown to the East must be said to be wrong. As to the mention and/or acceptance of indulgences in the East, please look at some of the links I gave on the other thread.

 

[bpbasilphx]

A certain Eastern Catholic bishop once remarked, “We think of ourselves as a bridge church, but we are surprised to discover that traffic goes two ways on a bridge.”

 

[ebed_melech]

It would seem that an avoidance of it is not a sign of unity. If it is indeed foreign to the East, then it must be said that the Roman belief is wrong. As far as I know, indulgences are never mentioned. Are they accepted?

Certain aspects of the Byzantine tradition are not mentioned or celebrated explicitly in the Latin Church. Are we to assume that they are somehow lacking in Catholicity and unity as a result?

The answer, of course, is “no”. Each tradition follows its own trajectory of development, but none is hermetically sealed. The fact that we do not untilize a system of “indulgences” does not mean that we somehow reject that system in principle or view it as heretical. There is nothing in the canons of the Church that says that every Church must offer indulgences. If Eastern Catholics which to avail themselves of them, I’m sure that would be fine, however.

God bless,

Gordo

 

[Volodymyr_988]

And you seem to say the pope is your father. Matthew 3:9, 23:9.

Uh, Pope and Patriarch both mean Father.

Yes, pot, the kettle is black.

 

[water]

You ended up moving to an area where their were no Eastern Rite Catholic churches within a reasonable driving distance.

Similar situation happened to my cousin. Where he got the job did not have any Roman Catholic parish, he quit the job and moved back to his hometown and got another job with lower salary.

I am happy that my cousin puts God first.

 

[Ignatius]

You ended up moving to an area where their were no Eastern Rite Catholic churches within a reasonable driving distance.

Yes, immediately after the Catholic and Orthodox reconcile and have intercommunion.