www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Orthodox Christian in Communion with Rome

You must be joking.

When I was in the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, I told someone that I was Antiochian Orthodox. They asked me, "What's that?" I gave them a couple minute explanation beginning with the reference in Acts that says, "And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." I explained about the five ancient Patriarchates. I told them where Antioch was today, how the Patriarch had actually resided in Damascus for many hundreds of years, etc., etc. After I finished, the inquirer looked at me blankly and said, "I just want to know what you are 'anti-.' What is an 'Ochian?"

From then on I just told people I was Eastern Orthodox ("You know, like Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox"). Even telling people that I was an Orthodox Christian, which was my preferred appellation, almost invariably lead to misunderstandings ("So your Jewish, right?" "I didn't know Rabbis could wear crosses" ). 'Eastern Orthodox' was usually understood.

I now have an even easier time since I can describe myself as simply 'Russian Orthodox' and everyone seems to know what that is. My only problem now is to find explanations for:

"Your name doesn't sound Russian to me. Was your Mother Russian?" "Well, no..."

"But you are Russian." "Umm, no...."

"But you do speak Russian?" "Only... No, I don't..."

The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune....

Fr David Straut

But "Straut" is simply a Russian name that was shortened. When your great-grandfather came over from Uzhorod, in the wilds of Holy Russia which was then controlled by Austria-Hungry in 1911 he only knew the Cyrillic alphabet. When he he said "Strastijevich" the Irish immigration officer rolled his eyes and wrote on the form "Straut" since he just finished processing a batch of Germans who came over on the same boat.

And you don't speak Russian since your Baba insisted that your father speak English at home since this is America. And the almost the same thing happened to your mother except she was really from somewhere near Minsk and remembered a little Russian. And what a waste that is.

Very creative! I love it.

I had a friend in Seminary who was a convert to Orthodox Christianity from Judaism. Not only did he change his first name at Baptism, but his surname as well. 'Silver' was transformed into 'Serebrov.' But then again, his ancestors may well have sojourned in Russia at one time.

My surname is actually an anglicized and shortened from of the Dutch name 'Straatmaker,' meaning 'Street-paver,' which I assume was the profession of my ancestor who made the sea trek to New Netherlands in the 1650's and planted my family on these shores. Perhaps there is a Russian form of this word that I could adopt as a surname!

Fr David

Well, if the average person doesn't understand what that means you've only yourself to blame. Next time use the full name:

"the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Diocese of the Eastern Rite Church of North and South America, Incorporated"

Now that, surely, is unmistakable.

Just to be ecumenical, the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church is not really incorporated in Canada (or at least it wasn't the last time I looked) - each eparchy is incorporated separately, in whichever province is its main location.

So I suppose the next time that I visit Canada I could claim a connection with the "Unincorporated Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church".

Fr. Serge

'Anti-Ochian' is new to me.

I have icons of Jesus and Mary in my workspace (blessedly un-corporate). But I have a beard, dark hair and brown eyes. That and the word 'Orthodox [home.att.net]' mean I've been wished a happy Hanukkah (as if Jews keep pictures of Jesus and Mary around). (Joy Behar jokes about getting that because of her looks and New York accent: 'Ma! I'm not Jewish!') Wearing my Russian winter hat I've been mistaken for a rabbi. I know Russian but yes, like with Fr David explaining can be awkward.

I'm an ex-Anglican who still claims and qualifies the word Catholic, not as a knock on anybody else (the opposite actually). So you're Greek Catholics (European name) or Byzantine Catholics (modern American) or to be specific in some cases Ukrainian etc. Catholics.

If I'm in a hurry and not talking about any other kind of Catholic I'll use the word without a qualifier.

The reason Etnick gave for Slav-American Orthodox retaining Greek Catholic is only one. Another is the words were/are in the legal papers (charters, deeds) of many of their parishes and a way to keep their properties (after a split from Rome) was to keep the words in the name.

Some say that Roman Catholic was invented by the Anglican English. (Nicer than 'the Italian Mission to the Irish'.)

Some Roman Catholics today of the 'faithful to the teachings of the Pope' persuasion wear the term as a badge of honour (their answer to American Catholic which used to be popular with some American liberals).

There is only one Lord Jesus Christ. The Church is His body. All who follow the apostolic tradition receive the Body of the Lord in the sacrament of the eucharist. The separation of the Orthodox and the Catholic churches is therefore a scandal that must come to an end in due time. Each Orthodox and Catholic Christian must pray daily for God's intervention in this sad situation.

Each one of us is a hopeless sinner. Only the Lord's grace saves us from damnation.

I was, I usually just say Orthodox and go in to more explanation if need be.

Dear Father David,

C. S. Lewis insisted on using the expression "Papist", on the claim that by using this term he managed to avoid saying either "Catholic" or "Roman Catholic"! It was of course purely coincidental that he was a Belfast Protestant and that even his friends at Oxford noticed that he was always inclined to think the worst of Catholics. As a direct response to this, people who are discussing Lewis and are themselves, ah, "Christians in communion with Rome" are apt to insist on ruling out the expression "Roman Catholic", even though they may use it themselves in other contexts.

This is by no means just my observation - I suggest Christopher Derrick's excellent book C. S. Lewis and the Church of Rome.

It may not be irrelevant to note that Lewis frequently asserted that his beliefs were to be found in the Book of Common Prayer (presumably the 1662 version, although he objected to prayers for the dead).

Fr. Serge

I only use the term "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" when speaking to apostolic Christians. I do this with the hope of engaging Latins about the Eastern/Oriental Churches, and engaging non-Latins about the Catholic Church. When speaking to Protestants and people of other religions, I call myself "Catholic."

Blessings,
Marduk

Do you encounter a positive reaction from apostolic Christians in the Orthodox Churches such as Greek and Russian when you use the term "Orthodox in communion with Rome"?

It would seem to me as red rag to a bull and it is the the sort of offensive terminology which the Vatican would surely prefer to avoid since it is an newly minted term and a quite unnecessary irritant between the Churches in dialogue. It helps to breathe new life into the old antagonism between our Churches, something we are trying to lay to rest. The term damages the "dialogue of love."

Bless Father Hieromonk!

You are more than correct and your words should be taken to heart by us all.

We should be about loving dialogue and anything that detracts from that is wrong.

Alex

I generally describe myself as either “Byzantine Catholic” or “Greek Catholic” and only use the term “Orthodox in Communion with Rome” when a further explanation seems necessary.

I’ve never had a problem with the term “Orthodox in Communion with Rome”. Perhaps this is a result of growing up in an area were there were lots of Eastern Christians. Most of the Orthodox Churches in my area officially called themselves “Orthodox Greek Catholic” (and most still do). This was resultant from their starting off as Greek Catholic parishes and then breaking communion with Rome and establishing communion with an Orthodox Church (either Constantinople or Moscow). So to consider that one was Orthodox in communion with Rome was neither surprising nor offensive. Add to this that in many places people floated back and forth between parishes, regardless of whether they were Orthodox or Greek Catholic. Cradles in both Churches often do not see much of a distinction between Catholic and Orthodox. They worship the same, they eat the same, and the only real difference they see is that they pray for different bishops.

When the OCA changed calendars in the early 1980’s (from the Julian to the Revised Julian) then Bishop Herman of Wilkes-Barre and Eastern Pensylvania had an interview on the front page of one of the Scranton newspapers. In the interview he had referenced that Byzantine Catholics had successfully made the change a decade or so earlier. He had defined Byzantine Catholics as “Orthodox Christians under papal jurisdiction”.

I do precisely the same thing, usually identifying as "Orthodox" our worship, spirituality, and theological roots and practices.

While I do believe, as I stated before, that anyone can refer to themselves however they want; I do think that the term is wrong as used. Not because I don't recognize that some of the particular churches in communion with Rome sprang from the Orthodox church, or that their customs and traditions are often very similar to those Orthodoxy; but because I think the term has a fundamental misinterpretation of what Orthodoxy is written in to it. It in my opinion implies that "Orthodoxy" is an Eastern expression of the faith. Joe posted a good summary in a different thread that I think is relevant:


http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/7/5/1.aspx

In other words Orthodoxy is not an expression of the faith, it is the apostolic faith itself; bound not by East or West, and encompassing the patristic heritage of both. Our conciliar/dogmatic tradition is different than that of Rome, and therefore to be in communion with Rome means not to be Orthodox as understood in the Orthodox church itself.

It seems to me that the term OicwR would probably require much more explanation than the other two. Just for starters it raises the question in the enquirer, "If you are Orthodox, why are you out of communion with the Orthodox Church?"