www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Hostility

Hi friends!

Since I first join here, I cant help but feel that there is a hostility against Rome here.

I respect that but why? Is there a "unofficial" belief that the Church of Rome is wrong in some aspects? Please draw the line between individual Roman Catholics/ Popes... etc. and the whole Roman Church (that includes all of her ecumenical councils)

If I got your perspectives right, it seemed to me that some Eastern Catholics are saying that the Church of Rome is wrong.

Is this correct? Dont mind to elaborate

Thanks!

There is no official belief that Rome is wrong.

As for hostility, I believe that your perceptions are correct, basically because Rome has "officially" told the Eastern Catholics to uphold their own traditions, over the past 400 or so years, Rome has been rather slow in assisting Eastern Catholics in this regard.

In Europe and America there were very strong initiaves among Roman Catholic hierarchs and laity to superimpose "latinizations" on the Eastern Catholics.

Despite Rome's offical stance, Rome did seemilgly little to correct this situation.

Many Eastern Catholics (clergy and laity) began to self-internalize this resulting in us considering ourselves to be "second class Catholics

The Second Vatican Council also supported Eastern Catholics in returning to their own traditions. But the sad reality has been that despite the Council resolutions and documents, many changes in the Greek Catholic churchs have been very slow in coming.

For example, now almost 40 years later, our bishops in North America are just begining to ordain married men to the priesthood as our tradition dictates.

The slow progress on ordaining married men in North America since Vatican II has been due to (1) lack of acutal support from Rome, (until recently) and (2) apprehensions from our own Bishops out of fear of upsetting Rome, and sometimes a sublte, internalized belief that celibate piesthood was better.

Sorry that my answer is short and unsophisticated. Got to go to work.

Anyone who wants to help me out, please feel free!

With best wishes to all!

Stefan-Ivan

Dear friend,

It is much more complicated than "hostility".

Among Greek Catholics (of various kinds) there is real love for Rome. Obviously, if there was no regard for the Great City, and no esteem for the Holy Father, the Pope of Rome, then all, and not only some of the Greek Catholics would have entered schism during the disputes in the 20s 30s and 40s.

The ties that hold us in communion with the Great City, and the Bishop of Rome are strong and important to the Byzantine Catholics.

It is said that "true love embraces suffering, for love's sake."

The Byzantine Church, has suffered for its communion with Rome. Stefan-Ivan describes well the mixed signals we endure. On the one hand, the documents of the Council, and the teachings of the Holy Father which clearly call us to witness to our tradition faithfully and fully, and on the other hand the disciplinary tangle of Congregations, Nuncios, and local "sensitivity" to the Roman Catholic majority's fears and problems.

So I would not use the word "hostility". But sometimes it is frustrating trying to follow the inspired teaching of the last Vatican Council, and the awesome letters of our Holy Father, while the structures and the Roman authorities don't seem ready to actually fully embrace these teachings themselves.

But there are wonderful and encouraging signs that the administration of the Holy City is beginning to move (a little slowly perhaps, but in a positive direction).

Elias

Hooded,

I am a Latin Catholic (Roman Catholic), born into and raised in the Roman Catholic Church.

When I first came on this forum I could not understand the 'hostility' given to the Latin Church - literaly I could not truely process the resentment, I could not comprehend it - at least well.

Now however, over some time, I am begining to get a clue.

We Latin Catholics have a superiority complex over the rest of the Universal Church. And mean that not by including Eastern Catholic Rites into the Latin Rite Catholicism, I mean that by saying *we* *Latin* Catholics have this *superiority* complex.

One might not even be concious of it.

Easiest to explain by remembering Peter's dream about the gentiles. Remember Peter and other Jewish Christians of the time thought themselves to be *above* and *better* then the gentile Christians of the time, it was Peters dream of the unclean food made clean that changed his attitude on this. Well we Latin Catholics are brought up and raised by the Church to internalize that we some how are the *chosen* Christians of Christ, we are Christs sole chosen people by virtue of our Latinism.

We learn this subtlely not by what we're taught of the Church (Universal) but by what we are *not* taught about the Church Universal. How many Roman Catholic high school students know that their are Eastern Rites to the Catholic Church? With traditions stretching back as far back as that of our own Latin tradition? To a typical Roman Catholic high schooler the Roman Church *IS* Christian history.

Of course most Roman Catholics would be thrilled to find out that we are part of this Universal (Catholic) Church that is so big that we have these long lost relatives that we knew nothing about -- the Easterners.

But still we have to get to the point where we accept ourselves as part of that Universal Church, and not the Easterners as part of *OUR* Universal Church.

A mental complex issue that may require therapy

Justin

P.S. By the way I accept the dogmas of the Catholic Church including Papal Infallibilty.

Dear Maximus,

Thank you for that in depth response about our hostility to Latins!

(And actually it's Eastern Catholic "Churches" rather than "Rites you Latin supremacist you! ).

I've thought about it and came to the conclusion that the problem is just that some Eastern Catholics and Orthodox have an aversion for the RC Church.

I know I don't. But hey, they say I'm Latinized so I don't want to be hurling stones that can hit me . . .

Alex

Dear Hooded,

I have noticed this too (you can hardly read a thread on this forum without noticing it). Sometimes when I experience it I find this hostility justified. Other times, I find it frightening and very unchristian.

I think the hostility towards Rome is directed in many different ways: sometimes towards historical wrong-doings, sometimes over today's bureaucracy in the Roman Curia, and other times it is over Roman Catholic doctrine itself. This, I think, is when it most distasteful, and unjustified. This is especially true when it comes from my fellow Eastern Catholic brother and sisters.

Surely we, of all Christians should be able to understand and respect our Latin brothers' theology, even if our Eastern Catholic Churches don't believe in precisely the same terms.

Should there be a difference in attitude towards Rome between an Eastern Catholic and an Eastern Orthodox Christian? I think and hope so. If we are going to fulfill our unique role of being a bridge between our sister seperated Churches and the Church of Rome we can not continue to operate with a "victim mentality" as I see so often demonstrated by Eastern Catholics.

Rome has asked for forgiveness and is producing fruits in keeping with repentence. Surely we can find forgiveness in our hearts as we wait for continued improvement.

In Christ's Light,

Wm. Der-Ghazarian

p.s. Alex, I don't think that just because you have a deep respect and love for Rome, that this makes you "latinized." Rather, you may just be a model of a true Eastern Christian for us all. Loving respect will lead us on the road to unity. Anything short of this is simply an exercise in pride and deceit and we must reject it as such.

See Alex I'm still learning I told you I only started to get a 'clue'.


Justin

If we are going to fulfill our unique role of [being a bridge between our sister seperated Churches and the Church of Rome we can not continue to operate with a "victim mentality" as I see so often demonstrated by Eastern Catholics.
]

With all due respect the Esatern Catholic Churches are not now, nor have they ever been, nor will they ever be the bridge between the RCC and the OC churches. Even Rome has conceeded that point

OrthoMan

Orthoman,

Thanks for your thoughts. Actually, this is what the Pope has called us to be, a bridge. With the help of the Holy Spirit, this is what I believe we can be.

In Christ's Light,

Der-Ghazarian

Who da man?

You da man!

You da ORTOMAN!

(O.K. I haven't said that for a while and felt a strong need to . . .)

I don't disagree with you, Big Guy, and I know that you didn't say because you hate the Eastern Catholic Churches. What you say is also what I have read and heard Ukrainian Catholics say on this topic as well.

And I really don't think anything that I would like to say in defence of this or that will contribute anything special to the debate.

What I wanted to raise is my own fascination with the quite positive comments about the Eastern Catholic Churches that come from Orthodox theological quarters these days.

It's almost as if RC ecumenical theologians are more negative than the Orthodox in general and that must be a good sign over all.

I particularly like the way some Orthodox leaders have suggested to Rome that the Eastern Catholic Churches ought to be "left alone" to be who they are as Particular, self-governing Churches.

I think that when that happens, some real dialogue can begin between you and us.

Ultimately, Big Guy, I believe God's plan for us is to be reincorporated with the Eastern Churches from whence we came, or with our "Mothers."

And yet there is that nagging thing about communion with Rome, which needs to be addressed and whose future structure will certainly not be the framework in which we EC's are currently in.

Have a great weekend,

Alex

Hmm. I thank you all for the replies. The "hostility" must be a natural defense machanism. I havent felt any "superiority" when I first learned that there is an Eastern Church. In fact I was happy to see an equal. So explains my innocence In fact I believe that it must be the Latins who need to humble themselves... (the Constantinople thing is a trauma for me)

I believe it is true that the EC is to be incorporated to the "mother" Orthodox Church in a future reunion. As to who's to be the Patriarch, beats me!

Going back to the hostility, I believe in the Eastern Catholics love for Rome. Lets all pray for a true Catholic Charity for all.

Thanks all.

While there was once the idea of the Byzantine (Greek) Catholic Churches being bridge Churches to the Orthodox Churches this idea has been long abandoned and the model of creating the union condemned (read the documents of Balamand).

Pope John Paul II has been consistent in his desire that we Byzantine Catholics become as perfect a witness of Orthodoxy as is possible. This is not so that the Orthodox will wish to accept our model of union but rather that we prove that it is possible to be fully Orthodox and in communion with Peter. While we so far have failed in this effort we have made great grounds in the last generation. We still have much work to do.

One of the most interesting developments in recent years is the willingness of Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople to both privately and publicly point out to Rome that there is no real reason for the Orthodox Churches to trust Rome when Rome continues treat us in a manner that shows that she does not yet understand the East.

I tend to see our role as bringing the Latins back into the oikeumene, but no matter which way the traffic is going, you must keep in mind that the bridge is going to get stepped on.

Dear Stuart,

If a RC Council, such as Vatican I, proclaims a papal doctrine, as it did, can other later councils undo or else modify them?

Since the Immaculate Conception is predicated on the Augustinian notion of the "stain" of Original Sin, if Catholic theology rejected that view of OS, what becomes of the IC doctrine?

It seems that ecumenical theology is like renovating a home.

You fix one thing and another thing immediately presents itself for repairs as well.

Believe me, I know from home renovations . . .

Alex

Alex,

The 'philosophical basis' that the Church wishes to express or articulate its doctrines doesn't do harm to the truth conveyed if it ever changes. What was Latin theology before Scholasticism? What was Eastern theology before they went from a soteriological understanding of the Trinity to an ontological one? St. Basil just changed the doxology to suit an ontologically-based one.

What will our theology be like if we eventually reject an ontologically-based Christology and return to a biblically-based (soteriological) one? I don't see it happening overnight, but inklings of its inevitable return is everywhere. The doctrine of Theosis is better expressed with a theology that is based on an orthodox subordination such as "in" the Holy Spirit, "thru" the Son, and "to" the Father rather than our thrice-"to" glory, no? But, of course, such subordination makes ontologist-believers squirm with discomfort. And when Byzantine Christians begin to consider Scripture and not metaphysics ...

Our Byzantine theology does not celebrate an Augustinian view. Does this not demonstrate that more than one theology is possible? Even the Pope has written that there are other theologies which express particular truths better than others.

Marcion couldn't deal with the Jewishness of our faith so he eliminated many books from his Scriptures. That's what Christianity would be like if we had to accept only one way as the right way to express our faith.

Funny how the infallibly proclaimed Marian dogmas (Immaculate Conception and Assumption) dealt with events outside the canon of Scriptures! How about that? So, I guess they can speculate and proclaim to the nth degree all they want. What will it do to the economy of salvation when it is all said and done?

Anyway, Byzantines got exhausted in their Search for the Ontological Jesus that they didn't have enough energy to do another Search for the Ontological Mary after giving her the title "Theotokos" and even that one caused a rift. Can anyone top that one?

Joe

[ 08-29-2002: Message edited by: J Thur ]