www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Pope should drop more titles, Orthodox leader says

Vito,

Thanks for re-posting this. I could not agree more. All of the chest beating out of Moscow on this issue makes me sick and is fundamentally disconnected from the reality of the situation on the ground. Kudos to Father Taft and Cardinal Kasper for the reality check. Now maybe the authentic dialogue can begin?

As to Rilian's comments, no doubt Archbishop Alejo of Mexico city and the Orthodox Church mission efforts in the Philippines
info [cs.ust.hk] only intend to help shepherd the substantial Russian and Greek diaspora communities in their respective countries.

Is Outrage!

Gordo

Mike,

You might be interested in this article on Papal titles. Article on Papal Titles [en.wikipedia.org] as well as Article on Pontifex Maximus [en.wikipedia.org] It appears that "Supreme Pontiff" was used from the 5th cntury on for all metropolitan bishops and that it was not until the 11th century that it was used exclusively by the Pope of Rome. The addition "of the Universal Church" came much later.

Again, as I said in my earlier post, the title "Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church" comes far too close to what was initially rejected by the papacy in the person of Gregory the Great. The Pope is not a "universal bishop". In his role as the Successor of St. Peter and head of the college of bishops, he is to "strengthen" and support the unity of his brother bishops who are equal in dignity to him as a bishop, but not equal to him in the primacy of his Petrine office.

As far as "Patriarch of the West", why not just say "Patriarch of Rome and the Latins"?

God bless,

Gordo

Again, I don�t see what this has to do with the topic of Bishop Hilarion�s comments. The Philippine mission AFAIK has nothing to do with the Russians but is under the Omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarch. Is your real issue with Bishop Hilarion�s comments, Orthodox missions in predominantly Catholic countries or specifically with the Russian church? It is not clear to me.

I think the church should expand where it thinks it can grow and bring Orthodoxy to every place where it may be received. The Catholics have just as much right to seek new members where they wish and in my opinion have should feel free to do so, especially if they share the opinion of the poster who expressed the belief that Orthodox faithful will not be saved. I would say at that point it is not a right but an obligation for Catholics to proselytize.

Andrew

Dear Friends,

To say that Western Rite Orthodoxy is a form of uniatism, as with the EC churches, is to completely misunderstand (or be uninformed as to) the history of the EC churches in Eastern Europe AND that of Western Rite Orthodoxy!

"Uniatism" refers to a mentality that appears to include two major factors:

1) Uniatism as an expression of ecclesial inferiority. A community that was somehow "forced" or else "coerced" into union with Rome (or another church or religion) as a result of either external pressures and/or a developing feeling of ritual/ecclesial inferiority among the bishops and others of the "minority group" that would, in their view, only be rectified by union with the larger church.

2) Uniatism as an expression of ritual/theological inferiority. The "minority" churches are either coerced by external pressures and/or their own bishops and others into adopting liturgical practices from the "majority" church as a result of a feeling that their own practices and ecclesial praxis needs them to be fully "complete."

In both cases, the standard the minority churches follow is that of the majority church which it is "under."

I think we can all agree that the above applies to EC Churches in varying degrees, notwithstanding movements of "Easternization" (which could also be viewed with deep suspicion, as we see in certain areas of Eastern Europe).

But how does the above apply to Western Rite Orthodoxy?

There is no compulsion for these groups to exist. If anything, Eastern Orthodoxy tends to be generally uncomfortable with them, even when they are accepted (as I heard during the Western Rite Antiochian Orthodox conference in Toronto some years back).

If anything, Western Rite Orthodox have no feelings of inferiority with respect to Eastern Orthodoxy - at the conference, the Western Rite people actually made light jokes about Eastern Rite icons etc.!

If a person voluntarily wishes to leave the Roman Catholic Church or other Western church/ecclesial group to become Orthodox and wishes to retain their Western Rite spirituality etc. and the Orthodox Church, in SOME cases, but not all, is accommodating to them - how is this "uniatism?"

It is simply an exercise in free will, friends!

And the Orthodox Church has the right to exist in the West to serve its faithful, as Andrew said.

How Orthodoxy here strives to "convert" people - could someone provide examples of any kind? That is not Orthodoxy's style.

What draws Western people to Orthodoxy is the beautiful liturgical traditions, the Jesus Prayer, the mesmerizing Icons and life in God, the emphasis on the social conception of the Divinity in the Holy Trinity, the Resurrection of Christ, the glory of the Mother of God and the Saints, Theosis.

This is what also made me part ways with the Latinized spirituality of a part of the UGCC for good - whatever "Latin " devotions I still have have been given a Byzantine interpretation by me - so I guess I'm a bit "Western Rite" in this way too!

But the Latin Church in Russia does indeed proselytize and I know that it does through first-hand information and eye-witnesses.

That is disturbing as it is two-faced.

Alex

Dear Mike,

Your personal information mentions your interest in entering a seminary.

But when you comment about the Orthodox, you seem to reflect a view that is entirely not in keeping with how Rome, theoretically at least, understands the situation of separation between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

We've discussed these issues here many times ad nauseam.

IF Roman Catholics believe that the only way to end the schism with Orthodoxy is for Orthodoxy to "come back" to Rome - what hope is there for ANY eventual reunion then?

IF you are saying that the relationship of the Eastern Churches, jurisdictionally, to Rome reflects the situation of the first millennium, then there would be some merit in what you say.

But since Catholic ecclesiology today, apart from those who still cling to the security of ultramontanism, is so far away from maintaining that truly erroneous view of church history in the first millennium of the Church's united existence, there is not.

I would suggest that before you comment within such a papal triumphalistic context, you do a review of current Catholic-Orthodox ecumenical relations and also, if this is not too much to ask, of Orthodoxy itself.

Or else just ask some questions here for the "Wise Men of the East" as I call them to answer for you and keep you apprised.

Alex

Alex,


"But how does the above apply to Western Rite Orthodoxy?"

According to your criteria the Western Rite Orthodox are indeed Western Uniates. Obviously the Western Riters felt the Episcopal, Evangelical, or Latin Catholic Church was inferior to the Orthodox Church or they would not have left them.

The Western Rite Orthodox, at least among the Antiochians, have been forced to accept some Byzantinazation. They must use leavened bread, they must insert the Byzantine Epiclesis into their Mass, as well as the Byzantine Prayer before Communion, Statuary is frowned upon, etc.

"How Orthodoxy here strives to "convert" people - could someone provide examples of any kind?"

The Czech Orthodox Church, the French Orthodox Church, the Portuguese Orthodox Church, and the OCA's Mexican Exarchate are made up of former Latin Catholics or offshoots thereof. The Orthodox Exarcahtes in Western Europe have their share of former Catholics not just diaspora Russians and Greeks. If one looks at the clergy list of the Russian Orthodox Metropolia of Italy one will see the majority of the priests are Italian not Russian. While they might not have been as successful as the Catholic Church at Unia or proselytism, the Orthodox Church has certainly done both.

While both Catholic and Orthodox Churches decry proselytizing from one another both are always going to have clergy that ignore this. If the Russian Orthodox can have a Metropolitan in Vienna for 5000 Orthodox. The Latin Catholic Church can certainly have 4 Diocese in Russia for 300,000 Catholics. The vast majority of whom are of Lithuanian, Polish, and German descent and are in Russian because that is where the Russians displaced them.

The Orthodox can't have it both ways. If they want no Latin Diocese (or Greek Eparchy) in Russia or any other Orthodox country they should close their diocese in Western Europe.

Fr. Deacon Lance

They haven�t been �forced� to accept these things. The last time the WRO came up in another thread I said

Bascially they are a liturgical rite. Their view, as I understand it, is that they are Eastern in theology but wish to maintain western liturgical praxis. You can argue all week and Sunday the merits or problems with this, but to call them Uniates I think is silly. Also considering the fact that 99.9999% of western converts become Orthodox in the Byzantine liturgical tradition, the WRO would have to be considered a major failure if you viewed them as being some sort of �Unia�.

The WRO I in my understanding gains adherents in the same way other Orthodox churches do, they are approached by people who are interested in converting. It is not the other way around.

I think both sides should be able to compete for adherents as they see fit and I do believe there has been legal recognition to given to some or all of the Catholic dioceses in Russia. There are also large churches in both Moscow and St. Petersburg. That's not to say the Russian government is or has acted as they should. If the RCC wants to convert Orthodox believers, I say more power to them. They should have the right and willingness to do so.

All of this to me however is a different issue than what Bishop Hilarion is talking about.

Andrew

Dear Father Deacon Lance,

Actually, Reverend Father Deacon, to quote the Administrator on another thread, "I am sorry to disagree with someone who has done so much good for the Church!"

Let's start with your (ill-advised) second point first.

Orthodoxy in the West, like Catholicism everywhere, will assert it is the true Church of Christ. So do all other Protestant churches et al.

Everyone says that.

That doesn't mean that is proselytism. The RC Church in Russia does indeed proselytize and I know Ukrainian Catholic nuns who are invited to ecumenical events in Ukraine who distribute pamphlets to Orthodox and others at the event to tell them they must come under Rome - or else.

That is true proselytism.

You haven't provided the specific examples that I asked for above in this respect, so you've got a way to go before you can convince me otherwise on this score.

Now for your first (equally ill-advised) point.

When I referred to "deficiency" I thought it was clear I was referring mainly to "ritual/cultural" deficiency in the first instance.

It is true, as you say, that some traditions from the Byzantine Rite Orthodox have been accepted by the Western Rite Orthodox who have voluntarily become such - and you gave examples.

When this was brought up at the Antiochian Orthodox Western Rite conference (i.e. the prayer of the good thief), I got up and asked Fr. Schneirla "Is this not 'uniatism?'"

He looked at me and smiled to tell me it was a fair point.

He then said that perhaps the Eastern traditions adopted by the Novus Ordo Latin Church also imply they have fallen under a kind of "uniate" mentality?

At no point, he said, did their Patriarch impose those things on the Western Rite.

If anything, Fr. Schneirla continued, the Patriarch of Antioch has become something of a student of the Western Churches and suggested a few things that would not upset the overall tenor of the Anglican rite.

Let's remember that BOTH Catholics and Orthodox consider the Anglican, Lutheran and other traditions to be "deficient" by Apostolic standards.

So I don't see how your argument holds water.

At no time has the Antiochian Patriarch suggested the Western Rite people discard their Anglican liturgical heritage in favour of the Sarum usage.

In fact, he has given his blessing to publish a revamped Book of Common Prayer - again, in both Catholic and Orthodox traditions that book would have had to have had additions introduced and that is not "uniatism" but simply adding items to bring out the fullness of the Orthodox Catholic faith those members now profess.

Don't take my word for it - write to him yourself! Also, I know a Western RIte Antiochian Orthodox priest who, throughout his active parish priestly life, constantly introduced Western traditions such as Eucharistic Adoration, the rosary, Stations of the Cross, devotion to King CHarles the Martyr - he told me that all this was O.K. with his Eastern Orthodox bishops who didn't much care what he or his parish were up to.

They even have, yes, STATUES!!

So both of your points are rather ill-advised . . .

Whenever you can come up with a) better arguments or b) concrete examples to illustrate your points, I am ready to be corrected and will humbly submit to your diaconal authority in all things, abjuring my erroneous ways and wholly giving myself under your commands and guidance!

O.K., so I'm a REAL uniate . . .

Old habits die hard . . .

Alex

Alex,

I am not questioning the fact that some Latin Catholics disregard the Pope's directives and target Orthodox for conversion. On the otherhand I don't by Orthodox claims that in Western Europe they simply minister to their diaspora. The French Orthodox Church is a perfect example they actively seek converts. From the Western Rite website:
"Metropolitan Germanos (Shehadi), while resident in the United States, engaged in negotiations to receive a Roman Catholic movement in Mexico in the 1920s."


Fr. Schneirla's statement to you is in conflict with the website of the Western Rite Orthodox:
"The ancient question that continues to divide the Roman Catholic and Western Churches from the Orthodox Church regarding the use of leavened or unleavened bread in the Eucharist had to be resolved when the Western Rite parishes were received into the Orthodox Church. The host used in Western Rite liturgies resembles the unleavened wafer used by Roman Catholics and Episcopalians, but in fact it is leavened�although flattened�bread. The use of leavened bread in accordance with Orthodox theology, was required by Metropolitan Philip when he recieved these parishes into Orthodoxy. Interestingly, antidoron is also blessed and distributed at these Liturgies."

Fr. Deacon Lance

Dear Father Deacon Lance,

The issue with respect to the Communion bread IS an issue of faith for Orthodoxy, as I understand, but it is not for the Western churches. Perhaps that is the hurdle that needs to be overcome. I don't know, again I'm a (trouble-making) layman.

Also, in my first line in my post to you above, I made a flippant use of a quote from the Administrator from another thread that I apologise to you and to anyone offended by it as it was taken out of a serious context and used in an unserious way by me.

I don't mean to hurt or offend anyone, but wind up doing it anyway, it would seem.

However, I withdraw nothing about that part of the statement that affirms you have done great things for the Church!

Don't bother thinking up a penance for me - I've a pretty good idea of a number of them that I should get busy doing right away.

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Alex

Alex,

I took no offense from your post. But if you feel bad anyway just say an extra prayer for me, I can always use them.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Who is saying they are only there to minister to the diaspora? In the case of the Russians (specifically), I said that is their primary interest. I said if approached however, I would assume they would accept a convert and would be happy to do so.

The French Orthodox Church is not under the jurisdiction of the MP. I have no idea what the outcome of their effort in the 1920's was, but I would be willing to bet the group in question approached them first. I doubt if they were out passing out leaflets encouring people to become Orthodox and listing the consequences if they didn't.

I suppose this all boils down to what you mean by "actively seeking converts". Are the Orthodox now open to receiving converts and are they opening churches and missions where it is likely they will get converts from western confessions? The answer is absolutely yes. Are they directly propositioning members of other faiths to join up? I doubt it, aside from maybe some individuals.

Andrew

Dear Father Deacon,

I don't feel bad if you don't. May God bless you and visit you powerfully with His Grace to answer your every need!

Alex

Dear Andrew,

Ah, you've raised an important point!

There are those Catholics, including Eastern Catholics, who feel that they shouldn't be encouraging ANYONE from other Churches to become Catholic for fear of committing the "uniate sin."

But when one Church or group seeks union with another out of its free volition - that is not and cannot be "uniatism" either.

The Antiochian Orthodox (who have been MOST helpful to all sorts of Orthodox cultural groups in North America including the Ukrainians) now has two Western Rites and has received a number of "Evangelical Orthodox."

There is an independent "Lutheran Orthodox" group (for want of a better term) who are close to the AOC. Then there are those Anglican Catholic and Polish National Catholic groups who have "toyed" with the idea of establishing communion with the AOC or Orthodox as a whole.

I know/knew three AOC priests who did go around and encouraged Anglican/Episcopal AND Old Catholic groups to join the AOC Western Rites.

That likewise cannot be likened to "uniatism" since BOTH Catholic and Orthodox Churches would regard these as being in need of communion with an Apostolic church etc.

And the situation today is quite different from what it was in 1596 and other times when bishops signed Unias with Rome without asking their flocks . . . This led to severe national divisions, such as in Ukraine, where tensions between EC's and Orthodox were heightened in the succeeding years.

Today, the people who want to join Orthodoxy or Catholicism are indeed expressing their free will to do so.

Alex

There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Thing is, we don't know the boundries of the Catholic Church... The Catholic Church would even consist by any church and heresy that accepts Christ as her saviour... Or by the Roman Catholic Church alone. I think the Catholic Church is limited to those which have apostolic succession.

btw, today a great step towards reunion has been achieved! My orthodox theology teacher at school agreed that there can be valid sainthood outside Orthdoxy!!