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

I've gotta go with the Lance person on this one.

First of all is the Gospel. This is the absolute and total touchstone of one's fidelity to Christ. If one is not following the Gospel precepts, then hang it up and go elsewhere.

But as to how one lives one's community/Church life, there are a lot of questions that derive from historical principles and realities. Romans do this. Orthodox do that. Oriental Orthodox do something different. Greek Catholics do some of this and some of that.

In terms of Salvation: do we REALLY think that Christ cares?

In terms of my working out my salvation, I've got to go where I can get the moral/physical/theological support I need to save my soul. Is one community better than another? Yes, because I truly belive that the Catholic and Orthodox communities give the best pathway to Christ and the especial graces of the Holy Spirit.

It's prayer and service. Don't get caught up in silliness.

Blessings!

Dear Friends,

I agree with Dr. John and Lance here.

I agree with Dr. John because he tells us not to get caught up in silliness, and heaven knows I've done that often enough . . .

It is clear that the Papacy and how we view it is integrally linked to the theological tradition of our Particular Churches.

These are distinct traditions that use different vocabularies and perspectives on the same reality.

The Byzantine tradition would emphasize the collegial aspect of the papacy in his univeral pastoral role.

Of course, we have no immediate relation to the pope in his other eight titles, including Patriarch of the West, Bishop of Rome, Primate of Italy etc.

Even when the Pope teaches "ex cathedra," the doctrines he has put forward for the faithful of the Roman Church were already held by the Eastern Churches (Mary's total holiness and sinlessness and Her bodily Assumption into heaven).

My two cents' worth.

Alex

Slava Isusu Christu!

It was a rather hot discussion wasn't it? I rather enjoyed it. It is nice to be able to work out theological issues here. Here in Ketchikan there doesn't seem to be many people concerned about the issues of Byzantine Churches, so it is really wonderful to come here and work out issues I have been having theologically and otherwise.

All of you are great!

Many Years to All!

Sincerely in Christ:


Chief Among Sinners, Robert

Dear Robert,

It is so good to read your posts, as they are serious, informed and extremely well thought-out!

I have always been fascinated by the Orthodox tradition of Alaska with Sts. Herman, Innocent, Joasaph, Juvenaly, Jacob Netsvetsov and Peter the Aleut and the missionary traditions and stories of conversion there.

St Innocent, Enlightener of the Aleuts drove around Alaska on his sleigh with his Russian Jewish doctor who became his first convert.

The Orthodox saints of Alaska are my saints too, and I believe they should be for all Catholics as well!

God bless you, Robert, Servant of Christ,

Alex

Passive-agressive personality illustration:

Frick: What you believe is stupid.
Frack: What?! What do you mean "stupid'?!
Frick: My, what fun this conversation is!

I think the words in Internet culture to describe this behavior are "troll' or "flamebait'.

Alex,

Yes, the Russian Orthodox saints of Alaska are wonderful, and the Russian Catholic churches in America venerate them and have icons of them too.

http://oldworldrus.com

Dear Serge,

I grew up in an environment that was not exactly what you might say "open" to Orthodox saints.

My earliest Orthodox addition to my icon corner in high school was the icon of St Job of Pochayiv/Pochaev.

A Greek Catholic priest was visiting us one day and happened to come across my corner where he saw the icon of St Job.

He quickly turned away and I thought it was because he was somehow offended.

I went after him to ask about St Job, about whom he knew everything.

I then asked him if our Ukrainian Catholic parishes will ever have his icon for public, liturgical veneration.

He simply replied, "Once they've matured enough in their own Eastern traditions, they will."

So he wasn't offended after all.

I still make that mistake today.

Like when I inquired after your beard . . .

Alex

Glory to Jesus Christ!

May I offer a humble word of caution?

In a forum such as this, hosted and moderated by Byzantine Catholics, it is good to see important and thoughtful exchanges of ideas. Questions having to do with the Papacy, and the unia, are of course very important to us, and are fundamental to the existence of our Church and its identity. I am convinced we must never shy away from real debate, and be willing to be challenged.

As a matter of courtesy, I think it is appropriate to be especially careful when we discuss such things, so fundamental to our view of Church. Certainly it is right to state one's own belief in a positive and honest way. I respect the fact that there are other views, than the one I hold. However, contrasting "my" view to my summary of "your" view is a much more difficult task, and very hard to accomplish in a way that is non-judgemental. I would tend to avoid such contrasting arguments. "You say..., but I say..." theology is frustrating.

I would also urge, that we refrain from anything which seems "personal". It may be possible to criticize a theological opinion, but it is never prudent to criticize a person directly, even if we might disagree with their views. It is not appropriate to characterize or label one another. "you are this or that, ...too latin, too conservative, too catholic, too byzantine..." I do not think it is wise to comment on the sincerity of one's Church membership.

It is also a recommended policy on this forum to speak of one another's Churches with due courtesy. We use the Church's own prefered title with respect. To belittle a Church as a "copycat" Church, or imply it is an imitation of a Church, does not really show sufficient respect in my view.

Please forgive me, a sinner who often falls short of charity, for offering these observations. A forum such as this always benefits when we err on the side of courtesy. While ideas and formulas of doctrine etc. etc. can be challenged, and even debated in a spirit of charity; let us strive to make this place a forum where everyone can share opinions and sincere beliefs without fear of a personal challenge of any kind. For we try to welcome everyone here, and make everyone feel welcome!

Thank you very much for hearing this poor sinner,

Elias

Fr Elias,

Glory forever.

In a forum such as this, hosted and moderated by Byzantine Catholics, it is good to see important and thoughtful exchanges of ideas. Questions having to do with the Papacy, and the unia, are of course very important to us, and are fundamental to the existence of our Church and its identity. I am convinced we must never shy away from real debate, and be willing to be challenged.

Agreed.

I would also urge, that we refrain from anything which seems "personal".

Agreed and I'm sorry. Still, objectively one may say whether a posting on the Internet is flamebait or not.

"you are this or that, ...too latin, too conservative, too catholic, too byzantine..."

Objectively, of course, a post's content can be categorized as any of those things.

It is also a recommended policy on this forum to speak of one another's Churches with due courtesy.

Something that until now I think I was known for. I felt I was provoked — that Orthodoxy was being trash-talked. So I reacted, hoping my many friends here would understand "where I was coming from' based on the context of this thread and my hitherto pretty good track record.

We use the Church's own prefered title with respect.

As I have. I don't use the word "Uniate' to name you and when I do type it I am careful to put it in inverted commas.

To belittle a Church as a "copycat" Church, or imply it is an imitation of a Church, does not really show sufficient respect in my view.

I have Byzantine Catholic online friends who have said virtually the same thing — hey, a Byzantine Catholic priest has said his and your Churches were "conceived in sin'; how's that for strong language? — so I thought I was still on solid ground there.

Considering there are those among us Orthodox who hold the opinion you are not even Churches at all, I thought what I wrote remained in the spirit of rapprochement I have tried to maintain here in my postings, though it was a little harsh. Sorry if I was wrong on that. Like I said, I felt provoked.

Please forgive me, a sinner

God forgives, Father. And forgive me, a sinner.

http://oldworldrus.com

Slava Isusu Christu!

Dear Orthodox friends:

Saint John of the Ladder declares in The Ladder of Divine Ascent that "we will not be condemned at the end of our lives because we did not perform miracles. Nor because we failed to theologize. Neither will we be condemned because we have failed to achieve the divine vision. But because of one reason only: that we did not repent continously..."

My brother in Christ, Serge and all the Orthodox on this board, I ask for your forgivenss for offending you and for not expressing myself in more adequate and empathic ways. I humbly repent in the name of Jesus Christ.

Sincerely in St. John of the Ladder:


Robert Horwath, Chief Among Sinners!

Dear Robert,

God forgives.

http://oldworldrus.com

Slava Isusu Christu!

Thank you my brother. Indeed He does Forgive; He has forgiven me so much in my life and I thank Him for His mercy. I need to develop my way of putting things in words. You know how Slavs are, and I certainly can't blame a temper on being Slavic, but it does help

You know so much more than I do about the East, as is evidenced by your website, so forgive my rudimentary ramblings, but there are some things I have to get worked out. I have so many issues with this idea that the Eastern Catholic Churches are a mistake, a holdout of an older outdated Latin ecclesiology, temporary ecclesial communities that will be liquidated eventually, and entities "concieved in sin." I have a problem with this wholesale chucking of pre-Vatican II Magisterium or even Vatican II Magisterium in favor theological opinions. I mean explain to me, in regard to the union of the Catholics with Orthodox, how can Rome recant of the very blatant and ultamontane statements of previous Popes and even their re-iteration by Cardinal Ratzinger in "The Lord Jesus". And also with the growing number of priests in the Catholic Church that are returning to the older theology and ecclesiological view of the Church, how can union happen without a concession by one party that one was in Dogmatic or doctrinal error. And if that were to happen then it would mean that either the Orthodox Church or the Catholic Church was the True Church. It would also create many more divisions in the Church, perhaps more than now.

So I am one Byzantine Catholic that not only sees his Church as one that is not only fully Orthodox Christian, but also fully Catholic. I love my Church and her traditions as you love yours, but as a Byzantine Catholic loyal to the teaching of the Catholic Church and the Holy Father I tend to be very sharp when it comes to those, especially fellow Byzantine Catholics, who may publically teach things that are contrary to official Church teaching. Again I am sure that you understand my position as I well understand yours having been an Orthodox Christian myself.

These matters are hard; our brothers and sisters are still killing each other in the old country over these very same issues, so I think these matters run very deep in us deeper than we know. There is much historical pain and there needs to be healing of these memories as the Pope has said.

May Christ our true God risen from the dead grant peace to all of us and reconciliation.

In Christ and the Theotokos:


Robert Horwath, Chief Sinner

Dear Serge and Robert,

I just wanted to add a little snippet about Blessed Basil Velichkovsky, beatified in Ukraine in June. He is buried in Winnipeg in Canada.

Basil wrote a treatise for Eastern Catholics on how to relate with the Orthodox and I thought I might share some items that may appear humorous in this day and age.

He tells Eastern Catholics not to "make fun" of Orthodox saints who sanctified themselves with holy prayers and works throughout their lives.

He seems to lambaste Byzantine Catholics for their uncivility in considering certain Orthodox traditions and rites as being "silly."

And so on and so forth . . .

He himself insisted on including all the local Orthodox saints in the calendars where he worked, wore a three bar Orthodox cross (unheard of for a Redemptorist) and in all other ways received the full expression of Slavic Orthodox culture.

Your posts here reminded me of him and of the time when I met him just before his death from a lethal injection of poison by the KGB - their idea of a "parting shot."

God bless you both, Servants of Christ!

Alex

This is an interesting thread. In light of Robert's latest post, I would like to ask everyone for clarification and supporting evidence on a few issues he raised:

What direct evidence is there that there has been the Roman Catholic Church has chucked all of the pre-Vatican II teachings? How is Vatican II is to be interpreted in light of Vatican I? How should Catholics understand Pope John Paul II's invitation to the Orthodox to help him better define the role of the papacy in a future reunited Church?

What evidence can be presented to support that a number of Catholic priests are rejecting current ecclesiological trends in favor of the more exclusive ones of Vatican I? If such evidence can be provided, how does this sit with the bishops who do support the current ecclesiological trend (since Vatican II) regarding the Orthodox Churches? [I watched some of EWTN's coverage of the USCCB meeting last week and there were plenty of references to the need to respect Eastern Catholics and Orthodox.]

The first mission of the Byzantine Catholic Church is, obviously, to proclaim the Gospel. The second mission, according to some of our bishops, is to someday see our ecclesial structures disappear when, after full communion with the Orthodox is re-established, we merge into a single structure? How should this particular understanding of our future be interpreted?

At the risk of being sued by Nike, the answer appears to be: "Just Do It".

If we Easterns (Catholic and Orthodox) just act like we are "one in the Spirit", and live and work and pray with each other, the documentation will follow.

At a recent meeting, a colleague of mine at the AFL-CIO said: "Policy is just a piece of paper unless there is someone designated to implement it." For us Easterns, we have to implement it, and the policy will come along at a later date. (Of course the Romans will want to write the document. Humor them.)

So: Just Do It.

Blessings!

Dear Administrator,

What an interesting set of questions!

There is no evidence to suggest that Vatican II has, in any way, "uncanonized" what Vatican I decreed about papal jurisdictional primacy or infallibility.

Vatican II may have tried to expand a more collegial and pastoral understanding of the papal primacy. But Vatican I was not challenged at all and by any Pope since.

The fact that His Holiness has asked the Orthodox for some ecclesial "policy input" does not mean that Rome would adapt to any new ecclesial model of church unity the Orthodox would put forward.

Rome knows where the Orthodox stand on this as this has been reiterated time and again.

And whatever His Holiness himself personally would like to see happen in the direction of the Orthodox, there are many other ecclesial and even bureaucratic considerations that would effectively mollify his good intentions.

Personally, I don't see this as entirely a religious issue, but an organizational/sociological issue as well against a backdrop of negative historical memories and the need to maintain an ecclesial identity and view of oneself as "We were the ones who were right all along after all."

It is only within the context of a great Union Council between East and West that these issues can be sorted out, especially with respect to the needed limitations on papal authority specifically as exercised over the Eastern Churches in any version of a reunified Apostolic Church.

The old Pope vs Council argument may put up a red flag for the Vatican.

But reunion will not occur through a series of papal pronouncements, but through an agreement of papal participation at an East-West Council table on the model of the first Seven in the history of the Church.

The way I see it anyway . . .

Alex