www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Catholic v. Orthodox

Dear Greg,

You raise some important questions.

In actual fact, the Catholic Church does indeed recognize the Orthodox Church as part of the True Church of Christ, even if it is in "rebellion."

As such it has valid Sacraments and communicates the Deifying power of Christ to the lives of its members.

This is why the Catholic Church recognizes ALL saints glorified by Orthodoxy as true saints (we don't question the canonizations).

That doesn't mean that the CAtholic Church is obliged to include them in its calendar. But it has chosen to include some that reflect universal Christian truths by their holy lives, such as St Gregory Palamas.

Saints are local, by their nature.

Something similar occurred in the Oriental Orthodox Churches with St Severus of Antioch.

The Armenian Church was the only one among them that, for the longest time, (am I right Brendan?), did not include St Severus in its calendar, even going so far as to raise questions about his faith etc.

As Brendan has pointed out, Catholic ecclesiology today is different from that of the Orthodox Church which allows for the acceptance of Orthodox saints who lived even after the Schism of AD 1054, at the discretion, of course, of the RC Church.

Meister Eckhardt has himself had his anathema revoked and the cause of Jerome Savonarola (excommunicated by Alexander VI at his execution, although historians now know this was lifted prior to his death) has resumed in Italy.

A number here have suggested Inter-Communion as a way to restore Church unity.

I strongly feel that when we know about and even venerate each other's Saints that that will be a great impetus to unity.

God bless,

Alex

Laudetur Jesus Christus!
Dear Mor Ephrem,
Please stay Syriac. It may be of some interest for you that Syriac Orthodox Church has very close although not full relations with Catholic Church. Read please following document, especially art.9 : http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/oo-rc_syrindia/doc/i_oo-rc_syrindia_1984.html . As far as I know similar communicatio in sacris exist also with antiochian Greek Orthodox Patriarchate.
As for the catholic view of the validity of sacraments in non-catholic eastern churches it should be noted that alredy in 3rd century Roman Church recognized baptism of schismatics and heretics (if those did not deny Holy Trinity). This view was shared by Alexandrian Church and opposed by Antiochian and North African (Carthaginian). The latter was at that time the only (purely) latin Church.
In Christ
Piotr C

Dear Mor Ephrem,
The bottom line is "What is the Will of Jesus Christ?"
Is this not true?
If Jesus desires the fullness of unity and faith, where do we find it?
"I, do not pray for these alone, but also for those who believe in Me through their word;"that they may all be one, as You, Father, are in me and I in You that they also may be one in Us..." (John 17:20-21)

Mor Ephrem, I have the greatest love and respect for the Orthodox Church, but at the same time I must confess for me I have found that unity in the Successor to Peter the Apostle, in the See of Rome. There I will live and there I will die.. And in the words of Luther (dare I use them) "Here I stand I can do no other."

Mir and Blessed Pascha
Stephanos

Dear Stephanos:

Of course, sine all bishops are the successors of Peter (Cyprian, On the Unity of the Catholic Church), I guess Mor Ephrem has nothing to worry about if he becomes Orthodox!

Mor Ephrem,

I am currently Byzantine Catholic. I intend to stay put--I love our Church. But ultimately I will do God's will. I am going to St. Vladimir's in Aug. 2002.

anastasios

[This message has been edited by anastasios (edited 04-19-2001).]

Dear Anastasios,

Two questions inspired by your post:

1. Could you please explain to me Mar Kyprianos' teaching about how all bishops are successors of Peter? Sounds interesting...

2. On a more personal note, you say you will ultimately do God's will. If I may ask, what do you think is God's will? In any case, I hope you enjoy your time at the seminary...it's a lovely place, Westchester county, NY. It's been home to me all my life, it's the best.

"In actual fact, the Catholic Church does indeed recognize the Orthodox Church as part of the True Church of Christ, even if it is in "rebellion." " That's what I thought and what would be true if the historical excommunications were lifted as they were reported to be. But what I don't understand is why I saw it announced in the newspapers that a RC clergyman (or monk, I forget which) converted officially to the Eastern ORthodox Church and the RC diocese declared that he was excommunicated from the Church. Generally, does the RC hierarchy excommunicate you if you officially convert to the EO Church?

The Catholic Church sees a difference between those Orthodox and Protestant Christians who came to the Christian faith through a non-Catholic community and those Catholics who (as, always, KNOWINGLY) break the bond of communion between themselves and the Catholic Church.

A person is the second situation is not excommunicated BY the Catholic Church but him or herself leaves the communion of the Catholic Church. It is an action of the person, not the Catholic community.


It is necessary for salvation. The Petrine Ministry has been absolutely essential in preserving the freedom of the Church and its ability to bring the saving message of Christ to million. How important it is for someone to affirmatively belief it in is doubtful. Until the 14th century, most Latin Catholics were unaware of the Pope.

K.

[This message has been edited by Kurt (edited 04-28-2001).]

Dear Kurt:
"...those Catholics who (as, always, KNOWINGLY) break the bond of communion between themselves and the Catholic Church." etc...
This is what I can't quite figure out.
If a person leaves the RC church for the EO Church, you say he excommunicates himself? The newspapers say it differently, that the diocese has declared the individual excommunicated. In any case, what does it mean then to say:
1. The Orthodox Church is part of the True Church of Christ. If it is part of the True Church of Christ, why then should you be excommunicated if you join it?
2. The historical excomunications have been lifted. Well, were they lifted or not. If they were lifted, then why should the Catholic authorities declare that you are excommunicated from the Catholic Church when you convert to the Orthodox Church?

I think I understand the conundrum. The problem is not the 'conversion' but rather the fact that the convert was a priest. Ordination imposes a special burden upon the priest to be obedient to his bishop. I suspect that the priest just 'left' without discussing it with his bishop. There are any number of cases where clergy of the Catholic or Orthodox dioceses have been 'released' from their diocesan obligations and obedience and have then moved to another jurisdiction without getting in hot water. (Some priests have even been 'lent' across the jurisdictional boundary without too much fuss -- or hoopla which might instigate the crazies.)

Christ is Risen!

1.Every person becomes part of the True Church of Christ on the day of their baptism, regardless if they are Catholic or a non-Catholic Christian.

2. Newspapers are not protected by the Holy Spirit from error (this is particularly true as to the editorial boards of the Chicago Tribune, the New York Post and the Boston Herald-American).

3. Having been part of the Catholic community and to leave Catholic communion is an act of schism, a break in the unity of the Church. I would say that to leave Catholic communion, as reception into Orthodoxy requires, one breaks commmunion ("ex-communicates") oneself. In the case of a simple layperson, one in charity might presume some extraordinary personal situation that justifies it. In the case of a clergyperson, such an individual is accountable to the community, therefore the Church might not be uncharitable but only stated the obviously to note he is excommunicated.

K.


[This message has been edited by Kurt (edited 04-30-2001).]

(Some priests have even been 'lent' across the jurisdictional boundary without too much fuss -- or hoopla which might instigate the crazies.)

The only case of this in history I know is the hieromonk Fr Lev (Gillet), a Frenchman and Ukrainian Catholic priest who was on permanent loan from Metropolitan Andrew (Sheptytsky) to Metropolitan Evlogy of the Russian Orthodox in Paris. Until his death in 1980 Fr Lev was (unknown to a lot of people) a Catholic priest in good standing.

Mor Ephrem, a few comments. As you are not now and never have been in the Catholic communion, many Catholics, including many here, would have no problem with your becoming Orthodox. In Catholic eyes you�d be the same as a born Orthodox � no bad judgement at all. (Kurt�s description of the Catholic view of Catholics who move to the Orthodox is right.)

Rather than asking, �Do I need to be in communion with Rome?� as if Rome is somehow more part of the universal Church than other Churches (I don�t lose sleep over whether or not I�m in communion with Constantinople), instead ask, �Can I believe that only the Orthodox (or the Syrian Churches) have grace and are truly the Church? Or, while including the East, is the Church bigger than the East?�

Serge

<a href="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus�</a>

[This message has been edited by Rusnak (edited 04-29-2001).]

Rusnak writes: "Rather than asking, �Do I need to be in communion with Rome?� as if Rome is somehow more part of the universal Church than other Churches (I don�t lose sleep over whether or not I�m in communion with Constantinople), instead ask, �Can I believe that only the Orthodox (or the Syrian Churches) have grace and are truly the Church? Or, while including the East, is the Church bigger than the East?�"

Since the Catholic, Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches possess the same, but divergent, Apostolicity and Sacramentality, the question to ask is: "Where am I going to be able to grow the most spiritually?" If you choose a jurisdiction that has only one parish in Fresno, California, and you live in metro NY, then you're not going to be able to participate to any great extent. Similarly with parishes in your own environ. If there's a Syrian Orthodox Church in Manhattan and a Malankara church in Connecticut, then the question would be: which one am I REALLY going to be able to attend and participate in?

You alone have custody of your soul; and you have to bring it back to God in fine shape. Pray and then make your decision on that.

Christ is Risen!

Dr. John,

How would you respond to a Protestant who claims that his Church is Apostolic, Sacramental, and to which he claims he can grow the most Spiritually? Are there some objective answers one might give, rather than what seems to be very subjective recommendations?

Dan Lauffer

A question to answer a question:

How could one question the spiritual giant and Anglican priest, John Wesley (for example), and the authencity of his personal encounter with our Risen Lord? How many of us, born to the Byzantine fold, ever achieve his deep spirituality and commitment to Christ?


That being the case, what would be the purpose of an "objective" query of a Wesley's, or Pennington's, etc., spirituality and their living relationship with Christ when the objective evidence of spiritual growth and authenticity is so evident?

From a pastoral perspective, what harm would I do to this Christian's walk with our Divine Savior if I called into question the legitimacy of a very personal relationship with the Living Christ; a personal relationship which is heavily subjective under all circumstances?


Vasili

[This message has been edited by Vasili (edited 04-29-2001).]

Vasili, the answer to your question is the favorite quotation of moderate Orthodox everywhere: �We know where the Church is; we cannot say where it is not�. To the Orthodox mind, and sound Catholics understand this too (it�s part of what Vatican II was trying to say), there is no contradiction between objectively knowing by faith there is a Church founded by Christ with a visible presence, boundaries and an apostolic ministry of bishops, and the likelihood that John Wesley�s (a man you can really admire) relationship with God was real. God founded the Church but isn�t limited by it. He can talk to anyone He wants. He�s GOD!

Serge

<a href="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus�</a>