|
0 members (),
274
guests, and
46
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,461
Posts417,217
Members6,101
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
... but they lack communion with Rome. That is, of course, a perspective, but there are others. Consider a Hindu saying that Christians "lack" deities. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978 |
I'm trying to look at this as I think Rome would look at it: The Catholic Church is found, in its fullness, in the Churches in communion with the Roman Church. That communion with Rome is something important and to break communion with Rome is a serious thing, some would say it is committing Schism. The Orthodox Churches are true particular Churches. They lack nothing sacramentally. The only thing, again I think from Rome's view, lacking is their communion with the Church of Rome. So, with that in mind when someone breaks communion with Rome, I can see why it could be problematic for that person to teach at a pontifical university. I doubt he would just be fired for becoming Orthodox but I'm sure there were conversations about what was best for him and the POI based on his conversion to Orthodoxy. Consider a Hindu saying that Christians "lack" deities. I don't see how that is relevant but actually if one were to ask a Hindu what was lacking in Christianity, I'm sure they would or could say the acceptance of other legitimate deities.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Well, I think some of your response is unrelated to what I said; but that aside, maybe I can make my point better this way: Like I said, I'm not denying your perspective, just pointing out that it is one perspective. Or more precisely, it's hard to deny that the Orthodox "lack communion with Rome" but not everyone agrees with you and me that being in communion with Rome is a good thing. (Now I've probably beaten the point to death.  )
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978 |
Like I said, I'm not denying your perspective, just pointing out that it is one perspective. Right, I don't deny there are more than one perspectives and most of my response was to Alex. The issue I was trying to address is that Fr. Constantine went from being a Greek Catholic to a Russian Orthodox priest. Alex believed that it would be an ecumenical injustice if Father lost his teaching job at POI because of his conversion based on Rome's ecumenical outreach to the Orthodox since Vatican II. He also said: As it is the Pontifical Oriental Institute where many Orthodox have taken their doctorates etc., there should be no reason why someone with such wide scholastic experience in the study of the Eastern Churches should be prevented from continuing his teaching there. My contention is that his conversion from Rome's view would be problematic because he was a Catholic priest, not an Orthodox scholar, and taught at a pontifical university in Rome. Should he be fired? No. Would his continuation at POI be problematic? yes, I would think so, not because he in an Orthodox Christian, but because he was a Greek Catholic priest and has left the Catholic Church. Or more precisely, it's hard to deny that the Orthodox "lack communion with Rome" but not everyone agrees with you and me that being in communion with Rome is a good thing. Absolutely, but I'm sure those in charge of the POI agree with you, me and the Holy See that being in communion with Rome is a good thing. (Now I've probably beaten the point to death. ) As have I.
Last edited by Nelson Chase; 07/11/14 06:26 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Right, I don't deny there are more than one perspectives and most of my response was to Alex. The issue I was trying to address is that Fr. Constantine went from being a Greek Catholic to a Russian Orthodox priest. Agreed, the other thing was a side issue. Unfortunately, I don't know what words to use to answer the central question here -- other than something like "It is what it is." Certainly, being out-of-communion with Rome to begin with is not the same as leaving communion-with-Rome (and, likewise, being out-of-communion with EOy to begin with is not the same as leaving communion-with-EOy, and likewise for OOy as well). But that is only a starting point to addressing the issue. A joint statement from the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation, which quotes and comments on the Balamand Statement, says this: 14. The Balamand Document speaks frequently of the "religious freedom of persons" (10) and "the religious liberty of the faithful" (24), of "freedom of conscience" (27) and "respect for consciences" (25), acknowledging "the inviolable freedom of persons and their obligation to follow the requirements of the consciences" (15). The language employed in modern presentations of this theme is familiar enough in the Western world in its concern for human rights, and is certainly not alien to either of our churches. In developing this theme, however, our churches have called attention to the need for a coherent understanding of community and therefore to the need to locate individual rights and responsibilities within the common good. When the Document speaks of "the faithful" and of their religious liberty "to express their opinion and to decide without pressure from outside if they wish to be in communion either with the Orthodox church or with the Catholic church" (24), this distinction becomes crucial. Neither the Orthodox nor the Catholic understanding sees the "faithful" only as referring to an individual Christian apart from community. Rather, we both urge that personhood can only ultimately be grasped in relation to the "Body" and, through the Body, to the tri-personal life of God. Where concern for the solidarity and spiritual health of the community as a whole is absent, the exercise of "freedom" and "liberty" can lead all too easily to the fragmentation of society and to the alienation of persons from each other and from God. (that's from "A Response of the Orthodox/Roman Catholic Consultation in the United States to the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church Regarding the Balamand Document", 1994) I think it would be quite simplistic for me to follow that with "See, there's the answer to the question about the permissibility of someone leaving Catholicism for Orthodoxy." Rather, I would say that the above quotation shows how we ought to think about the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,402 Likes: 37
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,402 Likes: 37 |
Dear Peter the Rock, What is "CAF?" Is that a new kind of Catholic airline? Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,518 Likes: 10
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,518 Likes: 10 |
Dear Peter the Rock, What is "CAF?" Is that a new kind of Catholic airline? Alex I am going to make an educated guess and say "Catholic Answers Forum".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,402 Likes: 37
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,402 Likes: 37 |
Dear Michael Thoma,
And I agree with you!
You've put your finger on the crux of the matter here - there is a tension between Catholics of all Particular Churches with their own theological and ritual traditions regarding what is of the deposit of the Catholic faith and what is the Particular theological expression of that same deposit.
It is often difficult to separate the pith and substance of that deposit from its varied theological expression.
And, as for our brother Peter's comment about "supposed to" - in fact, all Catholics MUST accept the common Catholic Faith without compromising their own theological, canonical and ritual traditions in the matter.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,402 Likes: 37
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,402 Likes: 37 |
Dear Nelson,
The Pontifical Institute of Oriental Studies is precisely that - an institute that specializes in the study of the Eastern Churches.
I can see this professor being removed from his administrative duties at the institute - but his professorial status? That would be entirely unacceptable along a number of fronts.
In addition, I have heard from EC theology professors over the years about this principle, if it is that, that any Eastern Catholic "has the privilege of returning to his or her Mother Orthodox Church."
Has anyone every heard of this?
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,518 Likes: 10
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,518 Likes: 10 |
In addition, I have heard from EC theology professors over the years about this principle, if it is that, that any Eastern Catholic "has the privilege of returning to his or her Mother Orthodox Church."
Has anyone every heard of this? I have never heard of that. It would certainly go against what the Catholic Church teaches about being herself the Mother Church to the churches of the East: 10. In fact, in the proper sense, sister Churches are exclusively particular Churches (or groupings of particular Churches; for example, the Patriarchates or Metropolitan provinces) among themselves. It must always be clear, when the expression sister Churches is used in this proper sense, that the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Universal Church is not sister but mother of all the particular Churches. Source: www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congrega...oc_20000630_chiese-sorelle_en.html#_ftn8 [ vatican.va]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 37
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 37 |
That is an interesting point -- the Pontifical Institute of Oriental Studies is an Institute. In my experience as an academic, Institutes do not have their own faculty, they borrow/leverage faculty from the colleges, schools, departments, universities, etc that establish and maintain the institute. Does anyone know if it is free standing entity? Given that you can't donate directly to the Institute (you really make a donation to the Gregorian, which is earmarked for the Pontifical Institute of Oriental Studies), it might not be. The real question then might be, will Fr. Constantin keep his position at whatever entity loans him to the Pontifical Institute of Oriental Studies (and as a side note that entity might be the Society of Jesus).
Justin
Last edited by Justin Oelgoetz; 07/14/14 04:10 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978 |
The Pontifical Institute of Oriental Studies is precisely that - an institute that specializes in the study of the Eastern Churches. Agreed. I can see this professor being removed from his administrative duties at the institute - but his professorial status? That would be entirely unacceptable along a number of fronts. I think even in his teaching post his new ecclesiastic home could be a problem. If you were a Catholic seminarian or student who believed that being Catholic (and Communion with Rome) is important, learning from a priest who has left the Church could be problematic, no? I don't think he should be fired for becoming Orthodox but I do think for the POI and Father Constantine another university position would be best for all parties.
Last edited by Nelson Chase; 07/14/14 07:15 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Good quote, but keep in mind that is talking about "mother church" in the sense of the universal church being the mother church of all particular churches, not in the sense of one particular church being the mother church of another.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,518 Likes: 10
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,518 Likes: 10 |
Good quote, but keep in mind that is talking about "mother church" in the sense of the universal church being the mother church of all particular churches, not in the sense of one particular church being the mother church of another. To borrow your own quote with a slight edit: "That is, of course, [your] perspective, but there are others." It is the teaching of the Catholic Church that union with the Pope of Rome is an essential part of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. If you read the Note on the Expression "Sister Churches", you will find the following: 4. The expression appears again in two letters of the Metropolitan Nicetas of Nicodemia (in the year 1136) and the Patriarch John X Camaterus (in office from 1198 to 1206), in which they protested that Rome, by presenting herself as mother and teacher, would annul their authority. In their view, Rome is only the first among sisters of equal dignity. Also, the Basilica of Saint John Lateran, the cathedral church of the Diocese of Rome, carries the title of mother church of all the churches and cities in the world. I'm just saying...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
If you read the Note on the Expression "Sister Churches", you will find the following: 4. The expression appears again in two letters of the Metropolitan Nicetas of Nicodemia (in the year 1136) and the Patriarch John X Camaterus (in office from 1198 to 1206), in which they protested that Rome, by presenting herself as mother and teacher, would annul their authority. In their view, Rome is only the first among sisters of equal dignity. Also, the Basilica of Saint John Lateran, the cathedral church of the Diocese of Rome, carries the title of mother church of all the churches and cities in the world. I'm just saying... Yes, I see your point. Oddly enough, though, this also confirms what I'm saying, i.e. there are different senses of "mother church": the sense of the universal church being the mother church of all particular churches, but also the sense of one particular church being the mother church of another.
|
|
|
|
|
