www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Former Byzantine Catholic Monastery received into Orthodox Faith

Dear Admin,

YOU SAID: No individual can claim that the bishops of the Church in a council chaired by the Holy Father and led by the Holy Spirit do not have the right to explain the Catholic faith to each new generation. The Church has the right to mature in its understanding of God and to present a more mature understanding to each new generation to help us grow in intimacy with the Lord. To choose a few quotes from history and to claim that it represents a perfectly mature teaching is to state that the Church cannot grow in its experience and understanding of the Trinity.

MY RESPONSE: Vatican II did not say the Orthodox are not Heretics, but actually members of the Church and that the Catholic Church is not the true Church on it's own but is along with the EOC. However this is how the council was interpreted, and this is exactly what the council ushered in: FALSE ecumenism, this is exactly why the SSPX was fromed. But to be honest I do not care what Vatican II said, I am simply trying to find God, and where he leads me is where I'll end up. If God leads me to Orthodoxy, Vatican II will mean nothing.

YOU SAID: If you read the documents of Vatican II and the teachings of Pope John Paul II on these topics you can see how the Church has matured in its expression of theology.

MY RESPONSE: THE documents of Vat II and those written by John Paul II are not infallible, that is very important to remember. Vatican II was a pastoral council, not a dogmatic council. And John Paul II has not declared ex cathedra that the Orthodox are not heretics and that you don't have to be Catholic to get to heaven, however Pope Urban VIII did decalred ex cathedra "...absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." But as I said above I will follow God where ever he leads me. If he leads me to the Orthodox Church,the words of Pope Urban VIII and John Paul II will not effect my faith.

Thank you and God bless!

No! You have summarized the teaching inaccurately. Vatican II and the popes since have taught that the Catholic Church is the true Church and that the Orthodox is part of the Catholic Church (although imperfectly so). Please don�t distort a Church�s teaching so that you can shoot it down.

Regarding your comments about Vatican II, Pope John Paul II and Urban VIII the Church does hold the authority to speak afresh about these issues. With all due respect, you are simply wrong in your conclusions.

I am glad that you are open to the will of the Spirit in your life. I will pray for you. Please pray for me.

Vatican II saying the Orthodox are part of the Church imperfectly does not change the unchangeable teaching of the Catholic Church that if one knows the Catholic Church to be the true Church he must become one with it or risk damnation. Vatican II can't "reinterpret" Urban VIII--councils and Popes can refine past teachings but cannot reinterpret them to mean new things. This is absolutely a teaching of the Catholic Church, that revelation does not change but may develop, while the development itself cannot become something new. In our humility we have to accept the Church's teachings at face value even when we don't like them, and this is such a case: the Catholic Church still considers salvation to be depended on being with the Roman pontiff, only it lessens the degree of responsibility in modern times to take into account diverse human elements that might obscure the clarity of this teachign (for instance the existence of 30,000 denominations).

anastasios

While the Balamand Agreement is certainly not an official document of any Church it does represent the thinking of (at least) the Catholic Church on this issue with respect to Orthodoxy. It was pretty clear that the issue of moving between Catholic and Orthodox Churches (in and out of communion with Rome) is not one of salvation and must be respected. It is confident to state this because it confidently believes that the Orthodox Church is part of the Catholic Church, even if that communion is still imperfect.

A person who comes to the understanding that the Catholic Church is the true Church must also come to the understanding that the theology she teaches is true. The theology she teaches includes that the Orthodox Churches are part of the Catholic Church, even if imperfectly so. It is not possible to be a �good Catholic� and believe that the Orthodox Churches are not part of the Catholic Church.

anastasios makes a good point about the responsibility of the individual involved being dependent upon the human elements that might obscure the clarity of the Church�s teaching. A person who comes to know that the Catholic Church is the one true Church and yet reject her does risk eternal damnation.

30,000 Christian denominations? Isn�t that number exponentially low?

30,000 denominations?

This number is based on the encyclopediac survey of Christian groups that was done a few years ago. What the authors meant was separate jurisdictions. Using their criteria, something that polemicists fail to clarify, the Catholic Church in the U.S. would have several hundred �denominations� since there are several hundred �jurisdictions.� Many also fail to apply this criteria to the Catholic Church structure with its many separate diocesan and religious groups having their own jurisdictional borders and authority.

A number of former Protestants who came over to Catholicism popularized the 28,000 or 30,000 denomination argument to show how fragmented Protestantism is. But if the Pope keeps creating new Byzantine Catholic eparchies for us (as large as 17 parishes), then they too can argue that Catholicism is fragmented.

Let�s be fair.

Joe Thur

Where do we teach these? Show me in our ECF material, hymns, prayers, liturgy, and feasts.

We celebrate the Feast of St. Anne's Conception, not the Immaculate Conception. I know because I cantor it.

The Filioque is NOT in our Creed. I know because I lead the people in chant.

We are in communion with Rome. The ONLY two infallible statements or dogmas we don't even celebrate. I know because I cantor the Dormition service (vespers + procession + matins).

Purgatory? Its not on my Theological Dopplar. Per the Unia agreements, its not a matter of discussion.

Try again ...

Joe,

1) It was already pointed out last time here that in the Byzantine Catholic hymns of the Feast of the Conception of St Ann, which is of course not celebrated on its proper day, that there is the interpolation "We praise they most Immaculate Conception!"

2) The Unia agreements have no force in our church. They were scrapped when the Orthodox hierarchs went to Rome and were reconsecrated by Pope Clement VII, and made a Latin profession of faith.

anastasios

anastasios

Dear Joe,

What about where the filioque has not been removed? The last I heard it had not been removed in the Archeparchy and there are parishes that take it. Is their faith different?

Or in Slovakia and Ukraine where (at least among the Ruthenians) the filioque is a no-brainer, it is there, it is part of the identity.

And the Ruthenian BCs of just 10 years ago...what were they? Different from the Ruthenian BCs of today?

Tony

Further, there are a whole set of texts that are not present in the Orthodox texts of that feast and the feast has assumed a higher rank.

And why is it not on the 9th?

A fair point. I was recently listening to an Evangelical Christian radio station which spoke about the need for unity among Christians. I seem to remember that the number they used was closer to a half million (but this might be because they count every �non-denominational� parish as a unique denomination.

Can you cite the text? There is no official English language text and the Slavonic books from Rome do not indicate such a phrase. Such a phrase would most likely come from the refrain at the canon of Matins and the one given for December 8/9 in the Basilian Menaion is �Most Holy Mother of God, save us!�

I disagree. They only have no force in our Church if we choose to let them have no force. Unless, of course, you can cite a text where our bishops have expressly stated that the union agreements are null and void? Anastasios seems intent on reading into everything the worst possible interpretation.

I agree that it should be moved back to the 9th. The move to the 8th was an arbitrary one to match the date used by the Roman Catholics.

Tony, can you provide an official reference to such texts, one that states that they are to be used in our Church? My guess is that some well intentioned but uneducated person invented them and that they have never been blessed by the Church.


Yes. We are different. Restoring an authentic Byzantine outlook on theology and liturgy takes generations. I can�t remember his name but I certainly remember the old gentleman who was the Slavonic cantor at the Johnstown parish in my home town. He took the filioque because it was the Greek Catholic custom. Never mind that the parish had been in an Orthodox jurisdiction for almost 50 years.

Dear J Thruth,

Eastern Catholics are in communion with Romea, this means that eastern Catholics must accept all Roman dogmas not believed by eastern Orthodox Christians, such as Immaculate conception, the filioque, Papal Infallibility, and Purgatory.

Catholicism is not united in one liturgy or in one set of preays and feasts, this is what is so great about the Catholic Church, it is very diverse, BUT the Catholic Church must be united in faith or it is not one Church!

It is true that eastern Catholics do not have to express their understaing of God with the Filioque,but eastern Catholics must accept it as a true and valid way of looking at the procession of the Spirit.

Eastern Catholics MUST believe in Papal Infallibility..if not then why are the Catholic and not Orthodox!

As I said in my orginal post, eastern Catholics do not have to use latin theology to express and define their faith but they must accept it as a valid way to look at an efine our faith.

God bless!

In Christ,
Ben

Administrator,

If you can provide the "official books" in Slavonic (as I imagine those are the only ones that will count in the end, yet they are also the ones no one uses here anymore) I will look for them. Remember that the official books from Rome that I am familiar with also have the filioque, even if in brakets. What does that mean?

Also, the texts are there in the Uniontown books. Do you use some of them but not others? If they are not official then which are the official texts in English? It seems to me that their de-facto usage gives them some position. Also books such as the "Velikyj Sbornik" from Preshov that have the imprimatur of the likes of Gojdic also have these texts. What does that mean?

Tony

//What about where the filioque has not been removed? The last I heard it had not been removed in the Archeparchy and there are parishes that take it. Is their faith different?//

So there is absolutely no chance to get it right? Even when we do drop the clause and don�t teach out of the Baltimore Catechism anymore, we still can�t win because you won�t let us. What the folks in the Archeparchy do is their business. Does the slip-slop praxis in Western Pa make the monks at Holy Resurrection Monastery in California Latin Tridentines? Yes, we belong to the same church metropolia, but one is more honest about who they are. Family disagreements go back to Cain and Abel. How to cooperate happily as a family hasn�t been the same since. It stinks, doesn�t it?

//And the Ruthenian BCs of just 10 years ago...what were they? Different from the Ruthenian BCs of today?//

And what was the Church prior to the Nicene Creed? Were they a different religion? Were they not Christian? Are you searching for that ontological difference the Ecumenical Patriarch always brings up as being the stumbling block? Getting it right would be much better if the target stops from moving.

Joe

No Joe you are really extrapolating. My point is if these usages you describe as making the BCs "Orthodox" make them so, then there was a time when they were not, right? And in some places since they don't have the same usage, they are not, right? If it is all about usage anyway.

Joe,

How about Anglo-Catholics? They look and act like RCs. Are they?

You have used the duck image here before, I am sure you recall. Does it work for them too?

Tony