www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Greek Orthodox to Byzantine Catholic

Hello Fr. David.

My experience was exactly that: the Roman Catholic priest I spoke to didn't seem to have a clue that by virtue of my being Greek Orthodox I already share the same faith as all Catholics. It is why I sought another avenue, and thereby found the Byzantine Catholic Church.

As an aside, this past weekend I informed several Greek Orthodox friends of mine, two of whom are G.O. priests, about my "change of address" to Byzantine Catholic. Not only were none of them surprised by this (for reasons I'll explain in a moment), but they confessed privately to me that they see no substantive difference between Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic (or between Roman Catholic for that matter). They fully understand that my faith has not changed.

The reason they weren't surprised is because they themselves -- all ethnically Greek and raised in the G.O.C. -- are incredibly frustrated at the divisive state of affairs within the G.O.C here in the United States (and, to a degree, the broader community of Eastern Orthodox churches in the U.S.). My two priest friends told me that there is a massive divide between the G.O. priesthood here (especially the younger more Americanized priests) and the hierarchy (the Archbishop, the Metropolitans, etc.). The hierarchs (most of them, at least), who have all the control, are trapped in a mindset of both Greek ethnocentrism and religious parochialism, and by continuing to aggressively push that mindset within the G.O. Archdiocese of America they are a big part of why any fruitful steps to the fullness of unified communion with the West remains an uphill climb.

This is why my friends weren't surprised at my move. The stubborn Orthodox attitude of "our way or no way!" does little to foster the unity and charity taught by Christ (and sadly there are many who perversely enjoy the battles that attend disunity). One of my priest friends, who expressed extreme frustration with the G.O. hierarchy, even told me privately that he would not refuse me communion in his G.O. parish even though I have moved to Byzantine Catholic. He said it is a sin to use the Body and Blood of Christ as a divider, when Christ instituted it as a uniter of all those baptized in the "one holy, catholic, and apostolic church," in which Catholics and Orthodox share the same membership.

At the Last Supper, Christ gave the bread and wine at the same time to Peter ("Rome/Catholics") and to Andrew ("Constantinople/Orthodox") and the other apostles, telling all of them (including Judas, by the way) "this is my body and my blood." Christ knew Peter was about to deny him. Christ knew Judas was about to betray him. And immediately after the sharing of bread and wine at the Last Supper -- immediately after partaking of the eucharist -- the apostles began arguing about who among them was the greatest (Luke 22:24) Yet in spite of the divisions among the twelve even then, Jesus still shared the same body and the same blood at the same table with all of them equally.

Don't we see the same thing today? The "apostles" in their present-day visible succession among Catholics and Orthodox are still arguing about who is the greatest. And in that argument they have made the body and blood of Christ a function of membership within divided church bodies rather than a sacrament of unity as One Body.

Anyway, I've digressed a bit.

My point, I suppose, was this: bottleneck is always at the top. By this I very simply mean that bottleneck to unity at Christ's Table is a fault of our leaders (be they ignorant R.C. priests or stubborn E.O. bishops), and a great portion of the laity and ordained on both sides are experiencing increasing frustration as a result. This frustration of disunity is one of the several reasons I moved to Byzantine Catholic: it is visible communion of East and West.

You will find the Ruthenian hierarchy, for its own reasons, equally resistant to unity.

Their deliberate actions to drive a wedge between themselves and their Orthodox brothers and sisters (documented thoroughly on this forum) are what are driving me away. Many others have already left, either to Orthodoxy or the Melkite Church (whose witness to unity I greatly admire).

I hope your "change of address" is fruitful and fulfilling, but I equally hope that you can endure the new challenges to unity that your new home has to offer.

Out of the frying pan...

Being Catholic doesn't mean you have to believe the state of the Greek Catholic churches is perfect.

Spite was and is part of the reason they self-latinized; understandable given tsarist and Communist persecution. Which is why the first Eastern Christians I knew, Ukrainian exiles, would tell you flat out they weren't Orthodox. You could call them Roman Catholics; just don't call them Orthodox.

The trouble with Easternizers who thumb their noses at the magisterium is they make it harder for good Catholics who choose an unlatinized form out of love for the rite, which is what the church originally wanted for that.

The trouble with getting fed up and 'doxing is you're idolizing a good thing, a traditional rite, over the universal church. Byzantium isn't universality; it's only part of the picture.

The church has both unlatinized and old latinized forms, as it should.

Not to digress further, but reading this makes me think of Frederica Mathews-Green comparing the issues in Orthodoxy with the issues in her previous church (the ECUSA) -- well, more contrasting than comparing. Which is not to suggest that everyone needs to have the same attitude toward Orthodoxy that she does. I hope you'll find the grass greener in Catholicism.

** UPDATE ON MY JOURNEY **

For the past month I have been in regular contact with a priest at a Byzantine Catholic parish (Ruthenian) not far from my home. He has been not only gracious and very kind, but his pastoral direction and counsel have been a tremendous blessing.

As I mentioned in my original post, following my first meeting with Fr. there was a canonical question regarding the process of my being received as a Greek Orthodox Christian into the Byzantine Catholic Church: could I be received into any Byzantine Catholic Church generally, or must I be received into the Greek Byzantine Catholic Church specifically (as opposed to Ruthenian, Melkite, Ukrainian, etc.).

So here's the news: I can be received generally, and in fact will be officially received next Sunday (10 August 2014) via a formal Profession of the Catholic Faith [sanctamissa.org], reception of the Mystery of Reconciliation (i.e., Confession), and the partaking of the Eucharist. (During the next week I will be engaging in intense personal preparation, accordingly as Fr. has guided me.)

As for my enrollment, here's the very interesting part. While I will be received generally (in this case at a Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic church), the priest informed me that my actual sui iuris enrollment will be in the Greek Byzantine Catholic Church (NOTE: the term "Greek Byzantine" here refers to one of the 22 particular Eastern Catholic churches, and is not to be confused with the general usage of "Greek Catholic" as synonymous with "Byzantine Catholic"). As such, after I am received, the priest who receives me must then send a notice to the nearest Greek Byzantine Catholic Church indicating my enrollment therein.

Now, if my information is correct, there are no Greek Byzantine Catholic (GBC) churches in the United States. As such, I'm not entirely sure who would be notified. With the highest concentration of Greek Byzantine Catholics being in Greece (and only around 2,500 at that, though this number may have grown since statistics were last recorded), I imagine it may be possible that notification of my enrollment would have to be sent to the Greek Catholic Exarchate [en.wikipedia.org] in Athens, Greece. This, of course, is just a guess, as I'm not versed in the more intricate particulars of this kind of ecclesial administration.

Either way, the good news is that my full reception into the Catholic Church will take place in one week. It's something I'm extremely joyful about. And I'm additionally pleased that I will not have to endure the unnecessary and time-consuming process of having to go through RCIA at the local Roman Catholic parish and wait until next April to be officially received as if I were a catechumen or a Protestant convert, rather than the Catholic that I already am.

Indeed, this same issue (although not necessarily wrt the GBCC specifically) has come up before, although I don't think I could find the thread.

Yeah! Glad to hear it worked out and that you're being received correctly and promptly!

Congratulations!
I am quite surprised, and confused, by the link you provide that they apparently plan to use a lengthy "Profession of Faith" taken from the Tridentine Rubrics of the 1962 Roman Missal, for the Reception of Converts. The Catholic Church is quite clear that an Orthodox Christian coming into the Catholic Church is not a convert. In fact no Baptized Christian is presently considered a convert. A convert is one coming into the Church from outside of the Christian faith.

The language of the Profession of Faith you link to is something I wouldn't be comfortable professing.

In the Roman Missal Typical Edition used in the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite the Profession of faith is simply "I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God." Ritual text, reception within Mass


This refers to "the candidate", which is a Christian other than Orthodox, because as indicated there is no liturgical rite for Orthodox coming into the fullness of Catholic communion.




I would add that in the recitation of the Creed you would profess it as Orthodox and Eastern Catholics do, without the filioque. But since you are making your profession in a Byzantine Catholic parish (Ruthenian) that won't be an issue. I would argue that a simple recitation of the Creed is an adequate "profession of the Catholic faith".

Hello likethethief.

Thanks for the congrats. And I agree with you, by the way. After a more detailed re-reading of the Profession, I too now share a bit of confusion. I am uncomfortable -- and rightfully so, I might add -- that this particular Profession seems specifically geared toward converts. I am not a convert. Moreover, I now get the impression that this Profession is for those being received particularly into the Roman Catholic Church, Latin rite, as opposed to being received into an eastern rite Byzantine Catholic Church, which is what I want.

I'm going to bring this to the attention of the priest who will be receiving me, and who gave me the Profession to read over (which I believe was sent to him from someone in the Eparchy with canon law background).

It is perhaps worth noting (and I do not say this as a disparagement at all, only as a further insight) that the Byzantine Church I have been going to is very heavily "Latinized," for lack of a better term. On some Sundays a small group prays the rosary in the sanctuary before liturgy, which I found extremely surprising. And I was encouraged by the priest to pursue rosary devotions. I do not object to any of this, and I do have Catholic rosary beads (though I mostly use an Orthodox prayer rope for Jesus Prayer devotion). Again, I have no problem with this (though frankly I will likely continue in my Orthodox-style devotions). It's just a bit heavy on the Latin flavor than what I am used to (and oddly enough, almost more so than the Roman Catholic Church I initially went to when inquiring about reception).

Thanks for the details you quoted in your post. I am going to use those as a basis for a little bit of further research, and will be sending an email to the priest immediately. I'll keep you updated.

Thanks!

So here's another update, with more good news: I emailed my Byzantine Catholic priest today regarding my concerns about the long-form Profession of Catholic Faith [sanctamissa.org] that he had originally given to me to read over, and which I was told I would profess this coming Sunday (8/10) when I am officially received. Using the incredibly helpful resources posted here by likethethief, and following the prudent advice of 2lungsambassador (who wrote "you may have to educate yourself and advocate for yourself," which turned out to be the case), I explained that I had reservations about the long-form Profession because it is intended for converts, and I am not a convert. I then outlined the specific details from the Canons (Eastern), official Church documents, and RCIA pertaining to the reception of Orthodox Christians into the Catholic Church, and asserted that it is likely more appropriate that I should recite the short-form profession.

He emailed me back and confirmed that I will indeed be reciting the short-form Profession, not the long-form.

And so on Sunday I will receive Confession, and will recite the Nicene Creed (sans filioque) with the following short-form profession added at the end: "I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God."

I shall then join the congregation at liturgy, where I shall receive the Eucharist. And at that, I will be a Catholic.

Thanks to everyone who was so helpful in offering advice and information on this matter. You have each in a very real way become an unexpectedly integral part of this journey of mine. I am indeed blessed.

JEREMIAH

I'm very glad that was helpful. Serving in the RCIA with adults in the Roman Rite for a number of years I have seen the great wisdom in using what the Bishops recommend in the Roman Rite for the Roman Rite. Sadly so many Roman Rite parishes go with permitted, tho not preferred, options. I'm not as familiar with adult reception in the East. We've not had any baptisms nor chrismations in my EC parish in the many years I've been there unfortunately. We have had a handful of people make the canonical change of Church to our EC Church from the Latin Church so I am quite familiar with that process.


I just re-read that post and was drawn to the very same quote.


Sounds like a nice solution. Although there is no Rite required and the Church wants to make clear the completeness/validity of the Sacraments of Initiation you received with Orthodoxy, I know from experience how much it also means to the congregation when they are able to witness someone coming into full communion. I'm sure it will be a joyful day for all.

I know many or most of us Eastern Catholics have such mixed feelings when someone leaves Orthodoxy, or one of us becomes Orthodox. Each of us has to find our own way. I don't know for myself how I would survive without being able to worship in Orthodox Churches. I also can't imagine not being in communion with the Catholic Church. I was just in the local Greek Orthodox Church for Paraklesis, and Tuesday night in OCA for Festal Vigil. I hadn't been able to go to either for many weeks. I felt like getting down on my hands and knees and kissing the floor, in addition to kissing the icons. Even though I cannot receive Eucharist there, the boundaries are so blurred for me. I consider the priests in those two parishes every bit as much my priest as the priest in my EC parish, and the parishioners I know there are every bit as much my fellows as are the parishioners in my EC, or Latin, parish. In the case of these two services, Paraklesis and Vespers/Matins, of course there is no Eucharist.

May your journey bring you closer to Christ and may you glorify Him in all you do.

[Again, it wasn't just the content of that Profession of Faith, but that it is from the Rubrics of the 1962 Roman Missal which is used for the Extraordinary Form/Tridentine Mass. I just still am perplexed why that was ever considered.)

:thumbs up:

I always say that if I were Orthodox I wouldn't switch to Catholicism, but that doesn't mean that as a Catholic I'm going to switch to Orthodoxy. (I don't want to rehash old conversations, of course, just wanted to chime in on your point.)

I can totally understand this. And I share the feeling. I love the Orthodox Church, and my spirituality will always be rooted in the east. But the Oneness of the entire Church is more important to me, and stepping into the Eastern Catholic "house" is, for me, one means to more fully bear witness to and live out that Oneness (which, I must confess, is far more difficult to do as an Orthodox Christian, due vastly to the inner barriers and impediments peculiar to Orthodoxy). This is the very call of Eastern Catholics:

I was speaking to a dear friend recently who is Greek Orthodox, and she and I both were struck with a kind of grief at my decision, not because I chose to move into the "house" of Catholicism, but because it nonetheless is a reminder of the absurdity of the division between West and East. More specifically, the grief comes from an acute frustration at the Orthodox hierarchy and their stubbornness and intransigence which, as many Orthodox see it, is a key impediment to unity. As it is, though, she completely supports my decision, and said she actually doesn't blame me (she herself sees the Catholic Church as far more charitable than the Orthodox when it comes to ecumenism and unity). This brings me to something you wrote in your most recent reply:

Thre's a lot of truth in that, and I share the sentiment. And I suspect many more also do, more than we may realize. In my Greek Orthodox friend's eyes, and in the eyes of two Greek Orthodox priest friends of mine in fact, they see little difference (generally) between Eastern Catholic and Orthodox. My one priest friend even told me he would not refuse me communion in his G.O. parish, regardless of my switch. (His explanation for this was intriguing and fascinating, but it's a subject more suited to a dedicated post of its own, which I may perhaps do.)

I was perplexed as well. After time allowed me a more thorough review of it, I was frankly shocked. For starters, the Sancta Missa (where the long-form Profession is found) is of the Roman Rite, not Byzantine. And so the fact that it was even considered was stunning to me (and I am absolutely certain it was forwarded to my priest from the Eparchy, which makes it all the more curious; my priest, as far as I could tell, was completely relying on the Eparchy for guidance on reception of Eastern Orthodox, which gave me the impression it was not something familiar to his experience. So this gives me reason to imagine that it's a top-down issue).

I also suspect this may be an indicator of heavy "Latinization" of Ruthenian Catholic churches here in the eastern U.S. (Eparchy of Passaic). I'm not implying there's anything wrong with this. But it's something I've noticed. (Though I must confess a personal "itch" about this, in that there's a distinct quality to Eastern traditions that, when supplanted, is a mournful thing. And to this I must totally embrace what is mentioned in the Orientalium Ecclesiarum, as quoted here earlier: "Eastern Churches ... have a special duty of ... religious fidelity to the ancient Eastern traditions.")

Thank you! I am joyful in my decision, and am looking forward to Sunday (the Feast Day of Saint Laurence Martyr, Archdeacon of Rome).

My belief on this, in a nutshell. Welcome.

I don't think most born Greek Catholics, different from online Greek Catholics, who are largely converts (born Roman Riters, ex-Protestants, et al.), give traffic to and from the Orthodox much thought. Partly because their identity is clearly Catholic first, and second because such traffic is rare. (Which is why Catholic priests are befuddled when it comes up.) The angst is in online Greek Catholicism, again very convert and caught between the two churches.

I wouldn't tell a Greek Orthodox priest to disobey his rules (except for coming into the church) but great and not all that surprising to hear of one who's not rabidly anti-Catholic. He has nothing to prove.

As for the Greek Catholics who love the (unlatinized) rite so they get a lot of sustenance from non-communing attendance with the Orthodox for special services, I'm with the majority view of this forum. That's great.

The church has both the unlatinized and the old latinized forms of the rite, as it should. Being Catholic doesn't mean you have to do latinizations, even if your new parish does.

Doing the Novus Ordo profession of faith as part of coming into church is a latinization but what the heck? You'll be in the church. My druthers in that situation: talk with the priest so he can see if you need instruction, then confession, the Nicene Creed without the filioque per the church's preference in this rite, and Communion at Liturgy.

Peter J.'s statement ("if I were Orthodox I wouldn't switch") is true in that born Orthodox get the benefit of the doubt so we don't solicit them.

Dear Serge,

I would love to attend Orthodox services, but I always get accosted by someone who demands that I "dox" as you say.

Don't know how you guys here get away with it. Conversely, perhaps when they see me, they are really impressed and then pull out the stops to try and get me to join them as a valued potential convert . . .

Is that stretching it? Yes? OK.

Alex