www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Vatican III: 2050 and the Pan-Orthodox Council of 2070, Part I

Alex,

Actually, I'm 'Greek Catholic.' I also had a big fat Greek Catholic wedding - with many Italians. A real quiet bunch.

God bless you and your family.

Joe

Dear Cantor Joseph,

The Big Fat Greek Wedding was filmed in my Church of St Nicholas in Toronto, although the exterior was filmed at Holy Trinity ROCOR parish (ours is, after all, a converted Presbyterian church - same Lord, though!).

God bless and try not to overtax your voice throughout the upcoming long services!

And be thankful you don't live up here where, in some parishes, you'd be obliged to do Holy Week and Pascha services twice.

Alex

Slava Isusu Christu!

Thank you all for reading my Byzantine Catholic Three Part Series work of fiction. It was my attempt to get the bigger picture of not only the gravity of schism, but also looking at how Our Lord might feel about it. My story was a work of Lenten fiction, nothing more; fasting can make you do wierd things

I wanted to get as many perspectives in my piece as I could. I wanted to give the Sedevacantists and the Old Calendarists their chance. I also wanted to give our Byzantine Catholic Church its place in the spotlight as well. We need it!
I believe our Church will have great clout in the Future Church.

What I wrote in the story was not what I believe regarding Vatican II; although the part about schisms in our Church and the Latin Church will have to be played out in times to come; let us pray and work for peace in the Church.

Regarding Vatican II: My View (Non-Fiction)

Vatican II gave us a Voice in the Church; it was just as much our Council as it was the Latins. It was prophetic in many ways. It could see the new global mentality arising and it addressed it. It switched the Church's paradigm regarding other religions in that the Church went from seeing what was inherently evil in these religions to appreciating what was good; in other words the Church wanted a stronger witness for the Love of Christ. It opened up the riches of God's Word to the Latins and made their Liturgy, of course at the expense of the previous liturgical grandeur, more approachable and emphasized the priesthood of the laos. And on and on. What went wrong was the how the mandates were carried out. All these actions: Communion in the hand standing, eucharistic ministers, altar girls, priest offering the Sacrifice facing the people were begun without approval from Rome ,in a maverick fashion, and eventually became so widespread that they could not be curbed. But Vatican II did not mandate these; the Council is not at fault. Some say the seeds for these kind of actions were already in the Council. No, I think rather the seeds were in the hearts of evil men who desired not that the Church transmit Her Faith in its pleroma, but rather to have a New Faith and be a New Church. They had to de-construct it to do so and you do that by doing what was once forbidden to break down the minds of the people to accept further change i.e. communion standing vs. kneeling, communion in the hand vs. on the tongue, ...etc.
But is Christ with that Catholic Church even with all the atrocities committed, YES! He promised to never leave His People and he won't Thanks be to God!

Regarding our Church: I believe whether or not schism will happen in our Church is up to our Hierarchs and how they handle the restoration of our full and rightful Eastern praxis. The New Generation is seeking Orthodoxy and Catholicity; it is seeking continuity and authenticity; our Church's special mission for the future I believe is going to be in reaching out to the Latino and Asian populations especially and all people generally with greater fervor.

In my story I mentioned that Vatican II was a failed experiment, but in real life I believe the experiments that followed the Council are to blame; the 'experts' who decieved the People and the Bishops are to blame; the Shepherds who led astray the sheep are to blame, but when thousands of bishops come together in Council in the Name of the Holy Spirit I find it hard to believe that Satan can work and take over the Council as the Sedevacantists assert.

In the last analysis all that matters is that we live a life of Holiness and fidelity to the Church with the focus of being with HIM in Heaven for ever. All the other stuff should be filed in our circular file.

God bless.

Rob

Dear Robert,

Generally, I agree with your assessment of the Vatican II Council and its application in the Western Church. The Council and the Popes were proposing reforms that they thought were necessary to open the way for better understanding between the separated parts of Christianity. Particularly important was the attempt to reduce the divisions with the Eastern Churches.

There was one odd thing, that you listed among the problems of the changes in the Western Church:
Coming from a Byzantine Christian, it sems odd that this is listed as a problem. It seems to me that this is a move by Roman Catholics to be a little closer to the Ecumenical Council's instruction that we are not to kneel on Sundays.

As I said, I mostly agree with your assessment.

Have a Blessed Pascha!

John
Pilgrim and Odd Duck

Slava Isusu Christu!

The issue I have with Communion standing in the Latin Church is that it is not a part of their Tradition, likewise taking the Eucharist kneeling is not ours: any attempt at archeologism notwithstanding. Just as we need to have authentic Eastern Liturgy so are the Latins called to, by the Second Vatican Council, as well to be faithful to the patrimony of their Rite. Liturgically we cannot talk out of both sides of our mouth.


In Our Lord,


Rob

And regarding the issue you raised with the Ancient Canonical Prescription that no one is to kneel on Sundays:

First, Communion standing, in the hand, in the Latin Church was started in several liturgical centers in europe ad experimentum. Some mention that early Roman Christians received communion in the hand, but this was done with a sacred cloth covering their right hand which would rest on the left and by intinction and was distributed only by the priest not by Eucharistic ministers or on the bare skin.

These experiments firstly, did not have the permission of the Diocesan Bishop until later when it could not be curbed; the same with freestanding altars and Mass versus populum. The purpose of these maverick liturgists was not to follow the Ancient Canons or to follow Tradition at all because they did not wait to have permission for their experiments: they just did it. I have a book with pictures of liturgical experiments in Europe that took place during the 60's and 70's that would make your head spin ala Linda Blair. Truly Sick!

All the current abuses from Altar Girls, Mass versus populum, communion in the hand et al were not done to return to a venerable Tradition, but to rather usurp Tradition and deconstruct it to further a liberal agenda.

One of our Byzantine priests told me one time: " If the Romans want to claim these things as returns to older forms then they need to take the whole thing not a little of this and that; you can't just have one book end you need to have the whole set."

Wise advice I think

In Mary,


Rob

ahhh but then we could all be 'surprised by the Spirit!
Stephaons I

So, Our Lord returns and . . .

Those who put sour cream on their pirohis were punished. Butter and onions only are allowed on the top, although prunes ARE allowed as filling.

THE END

Sorry, but I really felt the story was incomplete.