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

I am not sure how to ask this question clearly - so please bear with me and if you're not sure what I am trying to ask ... ask me to clarify my meaning.

Bearing in mind that I, obviously, do not have a deeply comprehensive understanding of the schism between the Eastern and Western Churches. But I've started reading The Orthodox Way by Bishop Kallistos Ware.

And to be honest I'm not seeing huge differences in the very core doctrines of things like the Trinity.

So here's my weird question.

What does Communion with Rome offer to the Eastern Catholic Churches, by way of theology, doctrine, dogma, Tradition or tradition - that makes you choose to be Orthodox in Communion with Rome and not simply Orthodox?

Dear Carole,

I'm taking a break from house chores . . . so I must be quick before I get called up on the (well-vaccuumed) carpet . . .

In terms of faith, Rome does not give us anything that we don't already believe, including the papacy itself.

For us, Eastern Catholics, communion with the Pope of Rome is an integral part of what being "Orthodox" is all about - for us.

I know that is offensive to our Orthodox brothers and sisters here, or could be, but they know me well enough (I hope!) to know I'm not out to offend them.

The Pope of Rome was the focus of the united Church's unity for almost a millennium - even according to Fr. John Meyendorff, and this I read in more than one of his works.

So for us our communion with Rome is part of what we see as being the Will of Christ for the unity of His Church on earth.

Speaking for myself, I admit that there are problems and issues with the way that communion has been/is exercised over the EC Churches - and other issues relating to faith that separate East from West today.

But, at the core, I believe we are "in communion with Rome" because, ultimately, we believe we are fulfilling Christ's Will for His Church.

Alex

Amen, Alex!

Gordo, who deisres to deeply understand the meaning of "Rome (roma) the church which presides in love (amor)"

Is it a sacrifice? Do you do - what you do not want to do - because you think Christ demands it?

Or are you united because you want to be ... you actually do find more fullness and charity - united to Peter?

Is your union one of the heart - or the mind - or both?

Just asking for clarification.

-ray

Is it a sacrifice? Do you do - what you do not want to do - because you think Christ demands it?

Or are you united because you want to be ... you actually do find more fullness and charity - united to Peter?

Is your union one of the heart - or the mind - or both?
----------------------------------

To my own mind, the commitment to full catholicity is both a source of great blessing and a cross.

Much like in marriage and family life where you have the joy of fruitful union as well as challenges and responsibilities of household chores (I had to throw that one in, Alex! :p ) and the refinement and purification of hearts and minds through constant self-giving in a myriad of ways, communion with Rome also involves a sense of fundamental self-giving without necessarily losing a fundamental sense of self!

It would be far easier to "divorce" and not have to worry ourselves any longer with what Rome thinks or does. But love for Christ and His holy will to maintain full unity between East and West, with Peter in the church of Rome as the matrix (or fruitful womb) of catholicity compells and inspires us to remain faithful.

Again, there may be days over the course of a marriage (I have been married to my lovely bride for 15 years) when the binding nature of the vows may be the only thing keeping a couple united. But there are also other days (hopefully many more!) when it would take more than vows to keep them apart!

Rome, with its equal blend of the human and divine, delights and frustrates, protects and demolishes, teaches and misleads by example, comforts and frightens - but all with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the infallable protection of Christ promised to Peter and the apostles and the maternal intercession of the Theotokos!

My two cents,

Gordo, who just heard the best line in a country song..."Does my ring hurt your finger when you go out at night?"

Dear Gordo,

Amen!

Alex

Dear Ray,

Well, for the UGCC, communion with/under Rome took a while to "take" so to speak.

The Union of Brest in 1596 involved a lot of chicanery by a couple of Ruthenian Orthodox bishops who owed a lot of money etc.

They were actually envious of the materially sound position the Roman Catholic bishops had within the then Polish Kingdom (ie. Cyril Terletsky).

And western European culture that was epitomized by Roman Catholicism and her Jesuit academies made anything Greek look rather poor (especially given that the Turks had overcome Constantinople and Greece) not to mention "barbaric Muscovy" as the Kyivan Orthodox scholastics referred to it.

And in those days, church unions and the like were from the top down, the people had little say, if any.

And when the union was a "done deal" the people themselves didn't seem to mind the Pope being commemorated (originally by the Metropolitan of Kyiv only). They would tend to say the reason their church was commemorating the Pope MUST be because the Pope finally saw the light and rejoined Orthodoxy!

And they themselves still called themselves "Orthodox" for to be "Catholic" meant that one was Polish . . .

The books printed in that time period variously referred to "Orthodox in union with Rome" and "Greco-Uniates."

Over time, the Ruthenian Catholic Metropolia (i.e. Ukrainians and Belarusyans) underwent a tremendous Latinization and even Polonization.

With Churchmen like Met. Andrew Sheptytsky, himself from a culturally and religiously mixed family background, the Ukrainian Catholic Church, as the Orthodox historian Dmytro Doroshenko wrote, became the "national church" of western Ukraine, especially Galicia (the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Volyn to the northwest of Galicia remained intact and was equally, if not more, patriotic).

In fact, the Ukrainian Catholic ethos tended to present union with Rome as a kind of needed "Western balance" to the Easternizing, and therefore Russophilic, Orthodox orientation that had as its ultimate aim the destruction of all things Ukrainian within a "Little Russian" mentality and entity.

So it is against this backdrop that certain Ukrainian Catholics are critical of Elder Rome in its relations to the Third Rome (although I wouldn't know who they are . . .).

Union with Rome nowadays isn't so much a cross to bear as it can be a real pain in the butt.

Alex

Alex,

May I be so bold as to ask what specifically is it about union with Rome that can be a pain in the hind quarters?

Dear Alex:

It IS a pain in the butt if you have not learned, or refuse, to SIT down and listen!

Amado

Dear Carole,

Actually, I can't improve on what Amado said above!

And we Ukies refuse to sit down blindly before Rome . . .

What if Cardinal Kasper has crept up behind us and removed the chairs?

Alex

That I think highlights an important distinction as related to the title of the thread. In my experience in Eastern Catholicism there were few people who identified themselves as "Orthodox in Communion with Rome". In fact I know some bristle at the very idea that such a thing would even be the case. It seemed to common to think of oneself as Catholic with a Byzantine liturgical heritage. I don't think there's a consensus regarding the identity of the EC's which to me highlights the complexity of which side of the fence you fall on (Catholic as opposed to Orthodox).

This board is very Orthodox friendly from what I can tell so far. My experience elsewhere has not been the same though. Amongst Eastern or Latin Catholics.

Andrew

Dear Andrew,

We just LOVE Orthodox here!!

We love them so much . . . I don't know what else to say!

We love learning from you, and also pretending that we ARE just like you! And if a poster here shows signs of being anti-Orthodox, I report them immediately . . .

We're also working on getting the Pope to adopt more Eastern-style liturgical vestments.

Did you see how he was attired for his enthronement?

That's because we Eastern Catholics got to him!

Bless you, our dear and always welcome Orthodox brother!

Alex

Sit?!? Next you'll be telling us to kneel! :p

Σώσον, Κύριε, καί διαφύλαξον η�άς από τών Βασιλιάνικων τάξεων!

Dear Kobzar,

Or even worse - GENUFLECT!!

Alex

Kneel? Genuflect?

At least, we do not ask you to "keel over!" :p

Amado