If the pope delivers a papal letter encouraging or condemning a certain belief or practice to what extent are Eastern Catholics obliged to teach and practice in harmony with him? I realize we have a different patrimony and spiritual traditions. E.g., we do not use the "Filioque" in the Creed. We don't use the word "purgatory" but do pray for the dead. We don't usually speak of the Assumption of Mary but of her Dormition. But these are at least variations on a theme.

A recent discussion has arisen that makes me wonder if we are also free to reject papal decrees like Humanae Vita particularly as it applies to Artificial Birth Control. Since the Pope is our highest Patriarch I wonder if that is really licet. If it is why are we in union with the Pope?

We also have different Theological outlooks that are foriegn to Latin Christianity.



Interesting question. One thing to look at is the Orthodox teaching on birth control and the Eastern practice of Economia. The ideal is of course to never use birth control but in man's weakness it is allowed, with the blessing of a priest, under the Churche's Economia with the idea to strive for the ideal.



Is Humanae Vita an infalliable teaching or is it mearly a pastoral letter? This is important to consider. I am looking forward to what others have to say.




We are not in union with the Pope but rather in Communion with the Pope. This idea needs to be considered. Does being in Communion with the Church of Rome mean everything that comes from Rome has to be applied to the Churches in Communion with her? Do we think that the Orthodox teaching on divorce and birth control are going to go away once communion is restored or is it possible to have two different approaches to these subjects? Are the Orthodox who use birth control, with their spiritual fathers blessing, all in sin because they use it?

In conscience I couldn't accept HV even if it was demanded of me, it's theology is just too misguided, and in the end is more about the authority of the Church than anything having to do with sex or procreation (see the article I linked to in the other thread for more on that).

The Melkites provide excellent examples in this regard, however, and I do not worry about having to warp my theology to try to fit HV. I quoted in the other thread the passage from Archbishop Joseph (Raya) of blessed memory's book which is often used in pre-marriage formation classes that essentially gives respect to HV but demurs from stamping it as a required teaching, instead leaving the ultimate decision to the husband and wife.

Bishop John (Elya), however, has been quoted as fully endorsing HV as the teaching of the church.

Both of these views exist within the church, and I encourage you to look at how this has played out. If Archbishop Raya was really teaching heresy, wouldn't you think something might have been done about it?

It's hard to imagine that the "conscience" is the supreme arbiter. Nevertheless, I do thank you for clarifying your position. I've sent a note to my priest. I'll follow his recommendation.

Enlightened conscience, informed by objectivity, IS the supreme arbiter!

It's hardly my original idea.

But you should read Ot'ets Nastorati's corrective.

Would not be better to discern what to accept from the priest you are seeking counsel?

By the way,



Bishops and priests here in Brazil teach very bad heresies and nothing is done about it.

***

If you do not mind, the correct name of the Encyclical is "Humanae Vitae" ("ae" is pronounced like the "e" of the word "French"). In that case, in the Latin Language, the declination "ae" points to a genitive ("the transmission OF human life..."). In the word "curriculum vitae" we see the same (it means "the course OF life").

That sounds pretty interesting. Like what?

You are of course correct. Just to reiterate, I'm a convert to the Eastern Catholic Church because I wish to be Eastern and Catholic. I'm not interested in setting my own conscience above that of the Church. If I wished to do that I would go back to being a Protestant.

I think what others are saying is that the Eastern Churches have a different theological understanding of the Universal faith than Rome. Humanae Vitae is a very Roman document, which makes since since it was written by the Pope of Rome and even then it didn't have the full support of the theologians that the then Pope consulted.

What I think is happening is that you have stumbled upon a topic that is hard for East and West to agree on. Is one right and one wrong? No, I don't think so. Is one more rigid? Yes. (my Ruthenian priest admits that the Orthodox teaching is much more pastoral) There is a tension between East and West and good one at that.

We Eastern Catholics are called to be Orthodox in faith and in communion with Rome. So naturally if we are going to be faithful to that vision then we are not going to be in complete agreement with the Latin Church. The Melkite Church is a wonderful example of this. I personally agree with Archbishop Raya.

Now not all Eastern Catholics will agree with that. I suspect your parish priest, whose podcasts I enjoy, will be more agreeing with Humanae Vitae. Which is fine with me. I say that because of his being a teacher of JPII's Theology of the Body.

Ultimately you have to follow your conscience in all matters of the faith and that doesn't make you protestant it makes you Catholic/Orthodox.

One thing to consider - the Orthodox are not united on this.

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Contraception

http://suscopts.org/q&a/index.php?qid=1128&catid=567

http://www.armenianchurchlibrary.com/files/whatisnfp.pdf

Interesting that, although the link is broken, one of the discussion group references cited at the bottom of the OrthodoxWiki page is to an thread on this forum, from many years ago judging by the thread number.

Nelson,

Since no one can actually say what the "Eastern" Church believes on this topic and cannot define what the difference in theological perspective might be on this topic except to say "follow your conscience" I suspect that the position opposing Humanae Vitae on the question of artificial birth control has very little to do with Eastern Christianity and a great deal to do with feelings and American view of the world. "Let ones conscience be ones guide" is not a Christian position.

I'll stick with Eastern Catholicism.

CDL

I very much fear that your understanding of (the primacy of the) conscience is neither Eastern nor Catholic!