www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West The Union with Rome reconsidered

I am not trying to make this personal. My observation was based upon years viewing this forum with its many topics devoted to the question of EC's relationship to Rome and EC's identity crisis: are we Orthodox or not? It would not be right for me to point out individuals, nor do I have any in mind.

This could be said pertaining to Protestant churches (albeit without saints) also. Of course God works through all people who sincerely try to follow him. However, by this logic dogma, tradition, doctrine, etc doesn't really matter, just as long as one is sincere. All I am saying is that the Orthodox Church contains the fullness of the Christian Faith. The Catholic Church shares in much of this, but not all. That's it. Even the Catholic Church, as Alex pointed out, believes the same, except that she believes it is the Catholic Church, not the Orthodox Church, that contains the fullness. And, as a Catholic, djs, you must accept this. Why is this so hard to understand? The Catholic Church believes she contains the fullness of the Christian Faith.

I do not believe that I am holier now that I left Rome. However, because I became Orthodox, I believe that I have a better chance and opportunity to become holier (or holy) simply because the Orthodox Church allows me to participate in the fullness of Christian Faith.

Can Catholics become holy? Of course!
Just because I became Orthodox, does that mean that I am automatically holier or better than any Catholic? Of course NOT!

Where do you get this from? Who said I believed this?

I believe this because I am Orthodox and that is what the Orthodox Church teaches. Who says so? The MP, the EP? YES. St Paul, St Augustine, St Gregory Palamas, etc.. YES.

And (sigh...again), the Catholic Church teaches the opposite. She teaches that she ALONE is the Church. Read your catechism! That is Catholic teaching. I am simply offering the opposing view for discussion.

My question to djs, jw10631: Do you believe that the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ and contains the fullness of Truth? If yes, then you accept basic and fundemental Catholic teaching. If no, you are going against the teaching of your own Church and relying upon your own opinion.

If you answer yes, then we can have a good discussion. If you answer no, then it is not worth discussing and you should be corrected by your brethren who accept and hold correct Catholic doctrine (as Alex pointed our earlier).

Greg

Dear Greg,

Well, I, for one, respect your sincerity and your doctrinal consistency in confessing Orthodoxy!

It sharply contrasts to the often "wishy-washy" ecumenical talk that dominates Catholic perspectives.

Alex

Thanks again Alex. Catholics and Orthodox need to be consistent and adhear to their Church's doctrine.

Greg

Dear Adam,

I have never suggested that Rome or Orthodoxy "return" to each other - that is a separate matter altogether!

The fact is that the "Uniate" Churches did come out of their Mother Orthodox Churches and the issue of their "return" back to their Mother Churches is an ongoing, historical one.

Fr. P. Bilaniuk once said that he believed every EC had the inalienable right to choose to return to his or her Mother Orthodox Church (I believe he was quoting another Catholic theologian at the time, but I don't remember who).

Ukrainian Catholics have "returned" to Orthodoxy en masse at different points in their history, as you well know. There is even an Orthodox feast in honour of the return of more than 3 million EC's under Met. Josef Siemashko (sometime in July).

I know of some Ukrainian priests (including one from my own parish) and laity who have returned to Orthodoxy (that is how they called the process).

As Kobzar has shown in the links he has provided to the response of the Ukrainian bishops to the latest events involving the eminent Kasper, the entire Ukrainian Church in Ukraine is upset that matters pertaining to our Church are being decided not in Kyiv or Rome - but in Moscow.

His Beatitude Lubomyr has already publicly stated that Rome's possible answer to us "not yet" would be unacceptable.

There is NO getting around it - we live in interesting times.

What Rome will say in the next while will have an impact on the UGCC in a way that we have not seen in a long time.

The main reason for this is that Rome will be seen by our people as kow-towing to Moscow directly.

And that means that Rome will be seen as Moscow's ally and not ours.

Ukrainians tend to share the same view of allies of Moscow as they do of Moscow itself.

Alex

Dear Greg,

Yes, and thank you for your personal and consistent witness to that important fact!

Alex

Oy Vey!

I'm not knowledgeable enough to even suggest an answer to the questions Alex raises. However, I would agree with his caricature of the UGCC's attitude toward both Rome and Moscow and agree with it. At least on this matter, they are both full of it.

Dan L

Dear Alex,

No, to be precise, you did not speak of a mutual Rome-Orthodoxy "return," but, as above, you used the language enough that I think the argument stands: the answer to injustice is neither division nor abandonment. Nobody should "return" anywhere because, quite simply, that is impossible. To ask or suggest that Ukrainian Catholics think about a "return" to their Orthodox roots is to misunderstand three things: (i) we never left the Orthodox Church! That Church entered into communion with Rome en masse and still exists as such today, disfigured, admittedly, by foreign (ie., Latin) importations but nonetheless intact; (ii) to whom are we to return? The Ukr. Orthx. Church MP? The Ukr. Orth. Church KP? The Ukr. Autocephalous Orthx. Church? Straight into the Russian Orthx. Church? How about the Greeks under the Ecumenical Patriarchate? Mistreatment in the Roman frying pan is no excuse to jump into the fire of Orthodox jurisdictional chaos and its "autocephalist ecclesiology" with relations "like those among nation states," as Nicholas Lossky has recently put it. No matter how bad the 'Roman road,' trying to go down this tangled, absurd pathway of Orthodox jurisdiction is so absurd an exercise as to make any sensible person turn around and go home, abandoning all ideas of "return" and realizing that, distasteful as it is, staying put is the better course. Finally, (iii) Kyiv, as we all know, is nobody's daughter: she is the Mother Church of all Rus'. How can we return to ourselves?

It is in this latter point that perhaps some way forward can be found: if we are not happy--and rightly so--with Roman treatment, and if we are equally unhappy with Moscow's power (which, in my opinion, is far more odious than anything Rome has done: Rome is at least motivated by some noble motives of Christian unity while I think Moscow is simply motivated by power for its own sake and a desire not to have to face the fact that their empire, politically and ecclesiastically, is dead), then we don't "return" to Orthodoxy, and we don't accept the status quo with Rome: we, as a Mother Church, assert our independence by simply doing what Taft said we do, viz., declare the Patriarchate ourselves and wait out everyone else. Recognition will come eventually. And no Orthodox in the world can utter a peep of objection to this: their own history, above all in Moscow, is replete with uncanonical (and in Moscow's case outright bribery and theft, as well as other criminal activity) grab-and-run patriarchates!

I think that Adam's first post (the one before the last) was good until his last paragraph. His last paragraph should be removed and replaced with Alex's comments above. Six months ago I said that the UGCC will have a Patriarch within two and a half (2 1/2) years. He will be crowned by within that period of time. We remain committed to this deadline.

We should not be confused with the sometimes 'wishy washy' views of some of our UGCC 'Rio de Jeneiro' bishops. Ukraine will dictate our direction and it is FAST FORWARD towards a Patriarchate. A decision-statement must be made by the Vatican in the near future so that the Ukrainian people can move forward in an appropriate direction.

The problem is one fundamentally related to the modern Ruthenian nation known as Ukraine. The Poles have come a long way in terms of recognizing our right to exist. In fact, my experience has proven that the younger the Pole, the more they are in solidarity with the Ukrainian people and a complete reconcilliation of the two nations.

The Russians just can't accept Ukraine's independance and continue at every opportunity to devise and implement strategies to truncate Ukraine's territory, retard it's modern national development, and if possible totally reincorporate it within their oppressive orb.

Ditto for our churches.

Rome has the moral obligation to be as open as Fr. Taft was in his recent letter regarding the UGCC Patriarchate. I would suggest a bit more diplomacy in terms of language.

Telling the UGCC members to keep waiting while the Moscow Patriarch states that we should not exist is absurd.

During the 1980's it appeared for a time that the Polish union 'Solidarity' was about to be crushed by it's own Polish communists on direct orders from Moscow. I remember the pontif having said that "he would have his papal ring 'smashed' and he would return to Poland if there was a Polish or Russian military crackdown on the union". The smashing of the papal ring of course meant that he would resign as pontif and go to the aid of his native Poland.

This is the type of response the Ukrainians are now seeking from the Holy See.

To the Greek Orthodox Church:

S H A M E - S H A M E - S H A M E

on your church for supporting your hierarchs on the decision not to recognize the legitimacy and need of a UGCC Patriarch. The Greeks were and continue to be persecuted by the Turks and you should be in Solidarity with the nation building of the Ukrainians - not against it. How will this type of behaviour bring Ukrainians closer to the Greek Orthodox Church ?

the eastern rites returned to catholcism, and some never schismed. the catholic church never sees the "orthodox" churches as heretical, however the "orthodox" churches sees the catholic church as being heretical. and who is it to say the roman catholic church isnt "orthodox" ? the 4 marks of the church are One Holy Catholic and Apolstolic. there is always one church, one faith. the catholic-orthodox church feud is too drawn out and needs to end for the sake of Christ, and for the sake of Christendom.

Well said Mateusz !

IMHO, that is what some in Rome, Constantinople, and Moscow fear - that Ukraine will not be feuding with any of these centers of Christianity and will seek to compromise all of them.

Gregory: Hardly. You actually said much more, and of a very personal nature. You posted a flame. Perhaps you now want a serious conversation. If so, please remember Ghazar's rule and its corollary.

Again, I said I was sorry if it took on a personal nature...that was not my intention, even if it came across that way. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Can we move on?

Yes. I am ready...are you?

Once again, djs, I ask: Do you believe that the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ and contains the fullness of Truth? If yes, then you accept basic and fundemental Catholic teaching. If no, you are going against the teaching of your own Church and relying upon your own opinion.

This is from Article Nine (816) of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I am not making this up:

Yet, there are Catholics on this forum who do not even adhere to this portion of the catechism.

For instance, Ipreima said:

Incognitus said:

JW10631 said:

Here I am, an Orthodox Christian, defending my faith and defending the Catholic view for Catholics on this board and I am labled like a fundamentalist. :rolleyes:

Therefore, djs, if you believe that the Catholic Church is the fullness of the Christian Faith, then we can have a serious discussion.

Which is it?

Greg

Gregory,

The Catholic Church also teaches that the Orthodox Churches are true particular Churches and are sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches and are vehicles of grace. This is far more than the Orthodox Church officially teaches in regard to the Catholic Church. Catholics can believe that the Orthodox Church is part of the One Church even though it lacks full visible communion with the it.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Deacon Lance,

It depends what you mean by part. For instance, Vatican I teaches that papal infallibility is dogma which must be believed by RC's and EC's in whatever capacity which the pope exercises it. Obviously, the Orthodox Church does not accept papal infallibility. Papal Infallibility is a dogmatic article of Faith within the Catholic Church.

So, how can the Orthodox Church, through Catholic eyes, be viewed as part of the One Church when the Orthodox Church is 1) Not part, within or under the administration of the Catholic Church and 2) Rejects a DOGMATIC article of Catholic Faith?

By "visible communion" I assume you mean administrative unity and Eucharistic unity. If so, then yes this is true. But the Orthodox Church also does not share in dogmatic or doctrinal unity with the Catholic Church.

Therefore, what kind of unity is left? There is no unity. We may share certain dogmatic and doctrinal Truths, but so don't Protestants. This does not mean that there is unity. And without unity, a church cannot be part (a full participant) in the One Church. How can you have a part of the One Church that is divided? St Paul clearly teaches against this.

Greg

How one approaches understanding who is part of the Catholic Church is dependent upon the criteria for inclusion. All those who profess faith in Jesus Christ already share a great deal with us. For the Orthodox Churches not in full communion with Rome, what they hold in common with us is, as Pope John Paul II has taught, �almost everything�.

Does this mean that the issues that keep us from sharing the same Chalice are unimportant? No, of course they are important. But it does teach us that one cannot use an all or nothing approach. A more realistic approach is to examine what we hold in common. If one does this one will find that we are already almost identical. Yes, the issues that still separate us are important. But to claim that we are not already united in many things is just silly.

The Churches grew apart from one another over the course of centuries. So, too, will they take time to grow back towards one another.