Hi, this is my first post here, but I apologize in advance if this is something people write about often and I should have been able to look through old threads to get information.

My personal situation is that I love the Eastern Church and particularly its expression at a local Orthodox Church but am a Roman Catholic. My husband and I have joined a Byzantine Catholic Church in order to worship in the Eastern Church without leaving Rome. The people at our Byz Church are very very warm, kind, and welcoming. Really just lovely, as is the deacon and priest. However I do still long for the full expression so-to-speak found at the Antiochian Church that is not too far away. (Our Church is more of an E/W hybrid.) I discovered the EO Church in college through friends. Two of my college friends are now khourias! And another two are EO priests.

Having encountered Orthodoxy at a convert parish there were many opportunities for learning. At our current Byz Catholic Church, unfortunately, we are one of the only non-ethnic non-cradle byz families, and some of the youngest parishoners. I am able to draw on my EO past experience, but my husband who would like to learn more has a bit of a harder time, although he loves the liturgy and people!

I haven't been there in years, but having a great Antiochian Church (Perhaps some of you may be familiar with it: Holy Cross Antiochian Church in Baltimore with Fr. Mathewes-Green and Kh. Frederica) nearby is a constant draw. We haven't gone there, even for vespers which our Byz Church doesn't offer, because I'm afraid that if we go, we won't be able to keep away, and it is not in communion.

What exactly is the Catholic Church's teaching on the status of those who go to the Orthodox Church?

Thank you for your charity in reading my lengthy post.

Eliz,

Welcome to the forum. Hopefully, you'll find membership here to be a pleasant experience - a place in which your love of Eastern Christianity is nurtured and appreciated.



No need to apologize. As to the subject matter, we've discussed it endless times through the years - with members looking in both directions (if you're unaware, our membership is a diverse community of Eastern and Oriental Catholics and Orthodox, as well as others - Latin and Protestant - with an interest in and abiding love of the East).

While I don't know how many are acquainted with Holy Cross Antiochian as a parish, many are familiar with Father Gregory and, I suspect, most all of us with Khouria Frederica. It's easy to understand how anyone could be drawn to a parish community in which they are involved.

I'm not completely clear on your query - whether in asking about 'the Catholic Church's teaching on the status of those who go to the Orthodox Church', you are speaking of formally entering into the Orthodox Church or 'going' there in terms of regularly attending Divine Services, but remaining in communion with Rome.

As to the latter, there is no issue. There are a number of Catholic members here, Eastern and Latin, who regularly attend Vespers and other Divine Services in Orthodox temples because the EC parish to which they belong doesn't serve those or merely because their spirituality is enhanced by doing so.

If the question is, rather, that of leaving the Catholic Communion and entering into the Orthodox Communion, you'll typically find the official Catholic position to be one of disapproval. One can find a range of opinions on what it means in terms of the spiritual consequences.

Whether to go or stay is never an easy decision to make - regardless of which Church - Catholic or Orthodox - that a person is considering.

Our history here, overwhelmingly, has been one of support to all who struggle with these issues and both respect and prayerful support for the decisions that each ultimately makes. While there are assuredly some here who take a dim view of any change that might be made, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any member who felt rejected or ostracized in any way for following whatever direction he or she believed God to be leading them.

That may be, likely is, a less definitive answer than you'd like to hear - and some would accuse me of waffling, of syncretism, of indifference. However, in all my years here, I have prayed with and for friends who felt compelled to make such choices - including at least a couple who have gone in one direction and later reverted to the Faith of their origin. In all that time, I've held fast to a firm belief that the trueness of Faith lies in the union of the Apostolic Churches - a union that will likely not be achieved in my lifetime, but for which I can pray fervantly.

Coming from that viewpoint, I find it impossible to suggest to anyone that their decision should be based on anything other than their personal heartfelt conclusion as to what God wants of them, a conclusion reached on the basis of much prayer and the guidance of a priest or spiritual father.

Many years,

Neil

Totally agree!

-Chad

You have presented a unique perspective and I'd be interested in more details if possible. What is the "expression at a local Orthodox Church" that is not found in a Eastern Catholic Church?

Again, can you elaborate on this "full expression" that is not found in the Byzantine Catholic Church (BCC)? In what way is your BCC parish an "E/W hybrid"?

Not to diminish the "convert parish" in any way but my own experience is that the ethnic-cradle background, so long as it is accepting to all, offers a link to the past and traditions that can be enriching, where there is not a sense of an ethnic parish but a parish with a beautiful and enriching ethnic heritage that is worth adopting.

I've been to Holy Cross some years ago for vespers on their patronal feast. It was very nice. But I've also been to Patronage of the Mother of God BCC (Baltimore) for vespers of their patronal feast (served by Fr. Mike and Deacon Bill of the neighboring St. Gregory of Nyssa BCC) and it was also very nice. So, to ask again but in a different way, what is the significant difference, why would a Catholic look to Orthodoxy rather than an Eastern Catholic Church?

At least one answer to the question posed in this thread.

May Basil continue to grow in the faith and knowledge thereof; his words came across to me as the ramblings and misrepresentations of a confused, misinformed and sophomoric individual.

The interviewer was better informed, more knowledgeable and unbiased.

In what specific areas was he exhibiting a deficiency in his understanding of the faith?

He misunderstands and misinterprets "papal infallibility" and quotes canons in the CCEO as though they were some extraordinary find on his part and like a "smoking gun." The way he brings them up shows they are an axe he wants to grind. Also, consider the number of times the interviewer is obliged to give the other side of the argument or even outright has to correct what Basil has said.

Eliz-
Welcome to this Forum!



I'm a not very frequent poster here who would fall into the category Neil has described:



This Sunday Divine Liturgy and agape meal I was in my home parish, Russian Greek Catholic, Sun. eve Vigil and Mon. feast DL both at a Russian Orthodox home-away-from-home, a couple of mornings in daily Mass in a Latin parish where I remain a catechist, and a couple afternoons at Mass and Vespers with the Dominicans in their priory chapel.

We've talked about having more catechesis in my Russian parish and continue to hope that may be coming. One of the best things for me has been for periods of time when we had a book group going. Perhaps you could suggest the idea of reading a book together.

For us this has tended to follow the Liturgical seasons. Right now we aren't meeting but we have read together at this time of year Winter Pascha: Readings for the Christmas-Epiphany Season by Fr. Hopko, for example. We've used quite a bit of Orthodox writing. If using Orthodox writers would be an issue for the parish you are in check Eastern Christian Publications which has lots of materials and probably the Byzantine Catholic Church also has. Personally I like materials that rely a lot on the words of the texts of our services and work from there. We have also read the Ladder of Divine Ascent during Great Lent. I like the Living God: A Catechism for the Christian Faith tho we haven't used it per se in my parish.

Our clergy were supportive of the book group tho we rarely had them sitting in with us.

Recently at the Russian Orthodox parish where I sometimes go I was told that one of their faithful said he's wondered what "Gospodi pomilui" means. I thought: Well, clearly there is a lack of teaching going on all around. I see it with the Latin Church where I am a catechist.

I hope you will express your wishes for more teaching to your clergy. And if the book reading appeals to you see if you can enlist others to stay for an hour after your meal and read something together. This being the Advent/Nativity Fast is an ideal time to focus on something together. In our book group we read aloud in the group. Trying to get people to read at home ahead of time had mixed results.

I wouldn't discourage you from going to the Orthodox parish but I hope you will also challenge your Byzantine parish to consider how they all might deepen in their understanding of our faith and practice.

You have a point listening to it again. Converts unfortunately can be pretty proficient axe grinders.

As to the radio interview. I think a little perspective might help. This interview was a follow up to an interview with Fr. James Babcock, a Melkite priest which can be listened to here. Fr. James does a good job in presenting the Melkite perspective though some might fault him for presenting the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" view as normative, though he does acknowledge that other Eastern Catholics may differ at times. Fr. James basically presents Eastern Catholics as those "who would like to disappear" and as having no significant differences with Orthodoxy. I know that's the view of some posters here also. Basil's interview is a continuation of that discussion.

Thanks for the link which I intended to locate after hearing it mentioned in Basil's interview. Overall I thought Fr. Babcock was informative, thin in some places, inconsistent in a few: I prefer and believe a more even-keeled articulation of Catholicism in its Eastern expression is possible and wanting. I thought he waffled on some of the typical issues (IC, infallibility, indulgences) although he had some surprising counter-points on others (purgatory). He was very diligent in not trying to speak for others.

Some of the things said by each man were, I thought, lacking in sufficient depth. Anyone can and does miss some points that are or should be obvious; no man is omniscient. One that surprised me, however, was the point about the reference in a prayer to making up what what lacking in the [sic] "crucifixion" of Christ[~27:20]. Neither seemed aware of its source which I presume is:

RSV Colossians 1:24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church.

Also, a sore point for me I admit, was the interviewer questioning the meaning of Catholic communion given the seeming diversity in belief's presented as allowable by Fr. Babcock. And I think the interviewer was right to do so because in a sense Fr. Babcock did waffle on that issue, taking the regrettable and counter-productive stance that amounts to I'd rather be Eastern than Catholic. The interviewer then contrasts this to the Orthodox communion which I say is de facto in it's sacramental practices more diversified, inconsistent theologically, and within itself best described as heterodox.

Also, a general impression, the East, Catholic and Orthodox, can in fact learn from the Latin West -- not just the other way around -- so knock-off the air of detachment from the West and the isolationism of a pure but incomplete Eastern synthesis.

Fr. Loya was mentioned -- is there a link available for that source?

Perhaps someone will post a link to Fr. Loya's interview. I'd like to hear it too.

As to Basil's interview: he's essentially replying to the earlier broadcast with Fr. Babcock, which was entitled "Eastern Catholics -- are they 'Orthodox?'" Fr. Babcock essentially said they were, which is the view of many Melkites. Not all Eastern Catholics, nor many Orthodox, would agree with that claim either. For example, this essay by Russian Catholic Joel Barstad: "Are the Ratzinger and Zoghby Proposals Dead?" concludes about the Eastern Catholic identity of "Orthodox in communion with Rome":



As for himself, Barstad has said elsewhere he no longer professes the Zoghby Initiative.

[my emphasis added]

Of course: such is the nature of communion. Rome (usually) speaks on behalf of the Catholic Church, true; but it should not be a case of them and -- or against -- us. One should also be able to say that any Eastern bishop asks the same profession of faith from Latin Catholics as he does from his own Eastern faithful. That is because, properly understood, "...in ipsa item catholica ecclesia magnopere curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est (Commonitorium, cap. 2.3)." (St. Vincent of Lérins) [Now in the Catholic Church itself we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all.] That is why the waffling and resulting disjunction of eastern and western theological expression and resulting ambiguity about beliefs is counterproductive.

I don't see Fr. Tom mentioned in this thread but if you are asking as regards the AFR interviews this was posted when these were discussed previously:

griego catolico 04/02/11 wrote:



I'm having some trouble knowing how most of this thread is addressing the question posed by our new member, OP, Eliz. She hasn't returned in the weeks since posting, unfortunately.

Thank you, likethethief, for the additional info. And apologies to Liz for the tangential discussion!

I found this additional info on the AFR program with Fr. Loya on this old thread and also here. I think this is from an era that predates the current podcast format of AFR.

That being said, perhaps griego catholico could resurrect the old program for us? I'd love to hear it!

I am not surprised she hasn't come back considering the tone of some of the posters here.

Seraphim the lurker

I stated my views on Fr. Babcock's interview on Ancient Faith Radio in the posts listed below:

Eastern Catholic Priest on The Illumined Heart of Ancient Faith - Post #362620

Two Recent Byz Cath Podcasts on Ancient Faith Radio - Post #364015

Two Recent Byz Cath Podcasts on Ancient Faith Radio - Post #364019

Two Recent Byz Cath Podcasts on Ancient Faith Radio - Post #364021

And

Two Recent Byz Cath Podcasts on Ancient Faith Radio - Post #364032

You can access Fr. Loya's interview on Ancient Faith Radio through Internet Archive at the link below:

East meets East

He has my prayers.

Apotheoun,

Thanks for finding that link to the archived recording between Fr. Loya and Fr. Schroedel. I'm listening to it now.

To go back to this question, one answer given in the interview falls under what I would consider fairly abstract reasoning for making such a decision. There are other obvious answers such as marriage or geographic considerations.

Perhaps the most basic answer is it simply falls to comfort with a given community, which I would say is probably just as likely for a Catholic who would attend an Orthodox parish as it is the reverse situation.

I've spoken to a number of people who have moved from Greek Catholicism to Eastern Orthodoxy, including cradle Greek Catholics, transfers from the Latin Church, and those coming in from outside, either directly into the Greek Catholic Church, or by way of the Latin Church.

The most common reasons given were:

Difficulty in reconciling the incoherence of the Catholic Church's attitude towards Eastern Catholicism; i.e., reclaiming the fullness of the authentic Tradition--except when it bothers Rome.

Real issues with certain elements of Catholic doctrine--principally the current understanding of Papal primacy and the Petrine ministry.

Desire to live more fully in the Orthodox Tradition, and running smack up against entrenched latinizations, most often taking the form of a severely truncated liturgical life.

Being tired of catching it from both sides--being accused of "uniatism" by the Orthodox, on the one hand; and of not being "real Catholics" on the other. They do have a point, there-- no matter which way the traffic is going, bridges get walked over, all the time.

Needless to say, while I realize all of these have merit, I don't consider them sufficiently irksome to drive me out. You'll all just have to try harder, I suppose.

Interesting and likely similar to a list that might have been compiled by many of those who left the Greek Catholic Church for Orthodoxy during the 20th century in the US.

The more things change. . .

A friend of mine who is a pastor sent me this several months ago. I just thought of it, and think it sheds light on the conversation. I've edited enough so that the parishes can't be identified, but will say it is from a larger city and not a small town.


The writer is a Roman Catholic looking East. His email speaks volumes.

Good Liturgy fills Churches. Bad Liturgy empties Churches.

It's funny. I attended a Greek Orthodox church before I became Eastern Catholic, and much of what you describe was in the GO church as well. Ambo to the left facing the people where the priest gives the homily, pews, kneelers.

Thankfully the rest does not apply to either church, but that setup didn't phase me until I attended other Orthodox churches, and realized the difference.

I suppose "Americanizations" and Latinzations have a lot of overlap.

Well, the Greeks went through this phase when all they wanted to be was Episcopalians who liked souvlaki and baklava. Their churches had to look like "real American" churches, inside and out--and that's when the stained glass, the pews, the minimalist iconostasis, and, ugh! the organ, all came into use. Paradoxically, having gone whole-hog into assimilation, they sought to hold the line by retaining Greek in the liturgy, long after most of their people stopped speaking Greek (hence, Greek School). The tide seems to be turning around, as people figured out that after three or four generations in America, a loose ethnic affiliation is not enough to keep people coming to what is, after all, a very inconvenient and counter-cultural Church.

It's kind of scary, but I've actually agreed with the past 5 or 6 of Stuart's posts!! I think I need another cup'o'joe!

Alexandr

Alexandr,

I may have to join you for some, too.

LOL, I've had the privilege of joining both Stuart and his lovely wife for both coffee and meals. Always good conversations among friends.

But, back to the topic at hand.


In places where the Greek Church has moved back towards tradition (Byzantine, not necessarily ethnic Greek) it is growing. This can be true of any Eastern Church. There was an article in First Things (one of the last few issues) that discussed the growth of Islam in Scotland. It seemed that the Scots were attracted to it because Christianity there had become so banal and they found Islam challenging. In some of the Protestant Churches you can believe almost anything - or nothing - and be called a Christian. Some RCs are not much better. How unattractive, and no wonder the churches are empty! It is those places where Christians are believing and center their lives on worship, and living the Christian life (a difficult thing) is where they are growing.

This does not mean that America must become Little Russia or Little Greece. Americans can radically embrace Christ without adopting someone else's ethnicity. New schools of things like liturgical music can spring up to serve.

I feel that we are talking to each other here rather than to the questioner.

To the questioner.
First of all, I know the Orthodox parish of which you speak. My son was a catechumen there, although he wound up being Chrismated at another parish in the end. I attend there, if I can, whenever I visit the Annapolis/Baltimore area. (after first attending an early mass at St. Mary's where I was received into the Catholic Church.) I also feel that it would be a wonderful thing to belong to that parish, that it has beautiful liturgy, good sermons, and a close, young, energetic community. If I lived near there, I might be dealing with what you are feeling. I attend as my home parish an old ethnic Ruthenian parish. The people are also wonderful to me, more than I deserve, but it is true that there are few young people (At 61, I am one of the young ones; now that I have let my hair go grey I blend in better The new priest is trying to move back towards a fuller expression of Eastern Christianity. But it certainly isn't like Holy Cross.

But it really can't be a matter of this parish or that parish. You have to figure out what you believe. Even if you convince yourself that it wouldn't really be too bad as a Catholic, to become Orthodox, the Orthodox don't want you on those terms. They want you to believe that Orthodoxy is The Church. Fr. Gregory has had experience with Catholics who became Orthodox because they loved his church, and who then continued to attend, and commune at, Catholic churches when they had reason to, with friends, family, or when traveling, or because they missed some Western feast. He told me that he told a certain person like this, who thought the two were really one church, that "this isn't the reality on the ground." He told my Orthodox son that he felt betrayed by this person.

I think you really have to decide what you believe. If you become Orthodox, whether they ask you to say so or not, you will be renouncing the "errors of Rome." Which include, at least, the position of the Pope as currently understood, as doctrinally taught, in Catholicism. I know Stuart will jump in and say that he rejects that too, as an Eastern Catholic. ( I don't really get this; I freely admit that I am a mostly a Western Catholic who loves the Divine Liturgy although I am letting Eastern ways sink in as much as I can) but even Stuart finds communion with the successor of Peter to be important enough to make him stick around on this side of the fence. It isn't easy to do because holy, wise, and learned people exist on both sides, and can make good arguments for both sides. Study is good, but it will never finally decide the issue for you. Prayer is what is needed.

You can be at peace while you pray, because God does not set us a puzzle and then blame us if we get the answer wrong. You study, you pray, and then you do your best to make the choice you believe is the truth, the one God wants you to make.

One thing you might think about is that it isn't necessarily the parish which seems to fulfill all your needs and desires which is the place you need to be. Of course there are some places (not usually Eastern ones in my very limited experience) where one really cannot pray, where what is happening is too disturbing for you to stay there without harming your spiritual life-and what that is, is different for different people . But a parish which just isn't "vibrant", which doesn't have much going on, which lacks much, could still be the place for you, so long as you can truly worship at liturgy there. God might have something particular to teach you there, or He might have something for you to do there.

I think you have the prayers of all of us with you as you struggle with this.
Susan Peterson

Circumstances recently arose where to worship in a Byzantine way, I had to attend the Liturgy at the local Greek Orthodox parish. They are trying to introduce congregational singing of the Liturgy - before, the choir did almost all the responses while the congregation just watched the ceremonies.

While I'm all in favour of congregational singing, what made this Liturgy a bit bizarre was that it was not accompanied by the organ (as usual) but by a piano. That was a first for me.

Once more I'd like to caution inquirers into Eastern Christianity to be on guard against idealising us. Sometimes our respective communities are more Christ-haunted than Christ-centered.

Susan,

Wonderful post! And thank you for the reminder to folks that we've strayed afar from the original poster's point of inquiry.

Many years,

Neil