www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Immaculate Conception

Alexandr's #2 is something I can attest to.

The priest from the BCC Mission in St. Louis is a bi-ritual priest. His predecessor was as well.

My current priest is not. I'm not so sure about the UGCC priests at the Church I attended in St. Louis. The priest is a Dominican but he is Ukrainian as well.

Why, I'll turn their names in to the Holy Inquisition!

If you make an assertion and can't back it up, why should anyone believe you? If the Church is making the Services public, then they are already performing them for everyone to see. They are not ashamed of doing them, so what's the problem of directing us to the Church's website?

Dr. Eric...with all due respect...I don't think Ed or anyone should be "baited" into disclosure if he is under the impression, and I think correctly so, that it may not be correct to do so...with the "police" that wander around here...

Chris

Rob - they are quite relevant in relation to your previous statement that this or that saint, as you said,
The point is quite clearly - it is not up to Rob to decide who is or is not an "ideal model". In the case of St. Gregory Palamas, the Church has decided - and as I mentioned, regardless of your inherent bias, the Church blessed the reinstatement of the service first in ROME.

Also the Union of Brest (which is the basis for my Church recognizing communion with Rome) does not even mention Florence once. The Union of Brest states: .

It is probably worth noting that Father David Petras' annual Typikon, approved for use in the Archeparchy of Pittsburgh and (I understand) also normative for the (Byzantine/Ruthenian) Eparchy of Parma, assumes that the Conception of Saint Anne is celebrated on EITHER December 8 or December 9, and gives both dates equal prominence.

The same annual Typikon names "Our Venerable Father and Confessor Photius, Patriarch of Constantiniple" among the saints commemorated on February 6, and provides pointers to the proper hymns. It also provides as an option the commemoration of Saint Gregory Palamas on the Second Sunday of the Great Fast, and gives full details for liturgical celebration if Gregory is commemorated.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Chris,

I can appreciate the sentiment and the reasoning behind it. But, you'll (plural) understand if I remain highly skeptical until the it is proven.


God Bless You,

Dr. Eric

Ed,

I'll give you Aristotle's answer:

A thing cannot be both true and false at the same time in the same respect. -- Principle of Contradiction

A Byzantine Catholic is Catholic under the respect (viewpoint) of adhering to all the doctrines of the Faith as annunciated by the Catholic Church, and Byzantine under the respect of adhering to all the Traditions of the Byzantine Church.

That's why Catholics of any tradition can communicate in the sacred mysteries of other Catholic rites, without ceasing to be of their own rite.

The daily headings from this year's Stamford Typikon:

Saturday, December 8: Our Venerable Father Patapius of Thebes.
Sunday, December 9: 28th Sunday after Pentecost; THE CONCEPTION OF THE MOST HOLY THEOTOKOS BY ST. ANNE.

The daily heading from last March 4 in the same Typikon:
Sunday, March 4: 2nd Sunday of the Great Fast. Our Holy Father Gregory Palamas, archbishop of Thessalonica.

While in the Ukrainian Catholic Anthology (2004), the Conception of Saint Anne is given on December 9, followed by this note:

Note that in the United States, where the Immaculate Conception is the national Catholic patronal feast, this feast is celebrated one day earlier, December 8, in accord with the date observed by Roman Catholics.

Obviously, the whole issue of this feast is in a state of flux, but there are no obvious signs either of controversy or high feeling over the matter - except possibly in this thread.

Diak,

I believe what I wrote in its entirety was:

"Lambasting the Apostolic See of Peter as heretical and the office of the Vicar of Christ as a heresy simply don't strike me as an ideal model for Catholics."

I think that's a reasonable, sound statement, and it's not simply a function of me. It should also be clear that it has nothing to do with Mother Theresa.

If you, or anybody else, does have official Vatican material on Gregory Palamas, please do post it, as I would be interested in reviewing it.

As for Brest, my view has been, which has been fully affirmed by all Roman Latin priests I have learned from and discussed matters with, that any omissions and ambiguities do not change definitive Church teaching and the obligation of all to affirm it. It would appear that this is clearly affirmed by Pope Benedict XIV in his 1742 pronouncement Etsi Pastoralis, which of course was issued long after Brest, and with full cognizance of Brest and its terms. The Code of Canon Law for the Eastern Catholic churches would appear to fully conform to this as well.

Robster

St. Maximus the Confessor was Roman Catholic?

A Church has a right to change her calendar.

Well I suggest you do your research before making such statements. The "novus ordo" Roman Calendar changed a lot of the feast days so that they would match the Byzantine Calendar.

Our Seminarians are taught theology from Saints Athanasius, Basil, John Chrysostom, and Gregory of Nazianzus. Looks pretty Byzantine to me.

What are you talking about?

I find this hard to believe.

Based on what!? Internet musings? People at parish have no problem at all living salvation via Deification or venerating Icons. That's what we believe!

Holy Spirit during the Ecumennical Councils.

As far as th East in concerned try looking up the major leaders of Vatican II you may be surprised to find a certain Melkite patriarch.

Uh lets see.... schism in 1054.... mine re-entered 1596 (sorry Orthodox for being rather partisan) and what have "adopted"? Nothing. The Immaculate Conception was believed by many in this and even prior to this period.

None, same goes for the Roman Catholic Church.

Nothing wrong with that seeing how the CCC was designed with Eastern Catholics in mind.

Name one dogma.

Alright..... why must I deny the Immaculate Conception (which I never will) for me to be "Byzantine" in your eyes? So all of the studying of the Eastern Fathers, even post schism saints like St. Simeon the New Theologian was for nothing?!? I am Roman Catholic even though I have never, not once, read anything from the Western Fathers?

Well I live in walking distance of a Roman Catholic church but instead drive 35 miles to go to my Ukrainian church.

This is becoming VERY entertaining. So I am a Roman Catholic? Okay THE ONLY THING DIFFERENT FROM ME AND AN EASTERN ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN IS THAT I
1. choose to accept the Immaculate Conception
2. choose to accept papal primacy and infalbillity

And that makes me Roman Catholic? Despite my spirituallity, which is purely Eastern, despite what I am taught by my vostochnik priest, the stuy of the Eastern Fathers.... sorry maybe in your reality I'm Roman Catholic, but in the real world I am an Ukrainain Catholic Christian.

The most recent popes have said The Eastern Church is a valid and co-existing and equal expression of the Catholic Faith.

Lol! They have not! I am extremely encouraged to keep a Byzantine theology! And as a Catholic I believe in the Immaculate Conception! Believing in the Immacualte Conception, despite your fits, dose not make me Roman Catholic. All it dose is confirms I adhere to the core teachings of the Catholic Church which are equally binding on both the Western and Eastern branches.

I think it is very funny for you to declare us "DOOMED!" lol

Indeed sad is it not? But despite everything Rome still stands.

I expect them to.

Good question. Simple Sinner could answer this better than I could.

Not being American.

I suggest you go to Ukraine, to Lviv, I guarantee you will change your mind.

Thanks for telling me. Anything else I should know or believe while you are at it? You know me being Catholic, I am sooooo fooled by that Bavarian grandpa and his pawns from California and West Africa.

Okay there is something you are not getting. Eastern Catholics are not Eastern orthodox. There are some differences between the two religions. Okay?

Again I will respectfully disagree, Rob - your statement was clearly meant as your own judgement of who is or is not an "ideal model". And as I responded it is for the Church to decide overall based on the holiness of the individual, and not on what you think. And I do think the example of Mother Theresa is quite relevant.

If one person can lose their temper, or another question the existence of God, or whatever the case may be, and still be judged by the Church a saint, it is not for you to decide who is or isn't an "ideal model" for Catholics.

The "Roman Latin" priests are not the ones who are Greek Catholic, nor are subject to the agreement of communion, nor are competent to speak of matters pertaining to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. We are a Church sui iuris , by the way, and not under the jurisdiction of the Latin Church.

Zan,

This point is moot. It is futile. As Eastern Catholics, we have to stop holding on to a false sense of who we are. We are Orthodox. When there is reunifiction, there will be no Eastern Catholic Churches. Ther are temporary.

Honestly, I understand why the Orthodox see us Eastern Catholics as a stumbling block to reunnification; We are!

How sad. No one wonder the Orthodox feel betrayed by us 'uniates'. We are basically Roman Catholics with icons. We exist because Rome let's us?

Wow. We still have so far to go.

I suppose we're just going to have to disagree, Diak. I think the Roman Latin Catholic priests I have discussed things with are exemplars of the Faith, and I highly value their views, in the absence of anything to the contrary.

When a Byzantine Catholic priest of mine tells me he doesn't care what canon law and traditional Church teaching say, I trust you'll understand that it's not just prejudices and personal preference when I don't accord him and his views the same regard.

I have heard claims from a number of folks regarding what the Vatican's views are regarding Gregory Palamas. I have seen nothing from the Vatican, and my own personal contact with the Vatican resulted in no affirmation regarding any view they may or may not have regarding Palamas.

Again, I would ask you or anybody else here, to please show me some internet reference, or perhaps printed, hard-copy document that I can obtain, that comes from the Vatican and authoritatively explains and details the Vatican's view of Palamas.

Regards,
Robster

I am the one holding on to a false sense of who I am? I am Ukrainian Greek Catholic. Not Eastern Orthodox, not Oriental Orthodox, not Nestorian.

Betrayed? We betrayed the Orthodox? Perhaps from a Middle Eastern viewpoint but as a Ukrainian I find this grossly inaccurate considering the past 100 years of history.

Listen, I am young. Not even 21 yet. I am a convert from new age paganism.

Despite having much to learn in the past months I have realized that there never will be a re-unification. It will never happen. Ask the monks of Athos, ask the heirarchs of the Russian Church. To much divides us the Byzantine Orthodox on an institutional level will never accept papal primacy nor will they accept Roman dogma as being not heretical. I accept this. Don't believe me? Ask the Orthodox on the forum! I am very comfortable being an Eastern Christian in communion with the bishop of Rome and I am proud to call myself Catholic and I am proud to say I stand with Pope Benedict.

Rome is trying their best to reconcile those Eastern Christians not in communion with her. But this will never happen on an institutional level. It's a wasted effort if you ask me. As far as I am concerned reunification can not happen on the international level but only on the personal and regional level, but in the current state of d�tente both things are out of the question.

God Bless.