www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Is it ok to join the Orthodox Church if no BCs are in the area?

Episcopal services are invalid, period. It would therefore be an act of idolatry for a Catholic to worship at an Episcopal "church".

Dear Lawrence:

Latin Trad is right. As you know, Rome recognizes the big-O Orthodox as part of the Universal Church, albeit not in perfect communion with the Church of Rome. The Church of England and its daughter churches are not.

As for "convenience," I can only say from my experience that many "Byzantines" seem to accept each other regardless of which side of the "communion with Rome" fence we happened to fall.

Perhaps the fact that there are a relative few of us in North America and the thirst for our own spirituality so great that we are able to overlook the political divisions of yester-year on the individual level.

Yours,

kl

A slightly more nuanced statement please.

*turns Latin Mode ON*

What exactly do you mean by "Episcopal services are invalid, period."?

While Anglican orders are generally invalid and their Eucharists generally so, their Baptism are, according to Latin theology, quite valid. I can't see how an act of worship can be invalid. Does God not hear the prayers of Anglicans?

If a Catholic adores the Sacrament in an Anglican setting, I can see how that becomes problematic, but even then one has to bear in mind that there ARE Anglican clerics with valid orders, often taken from the Old Catholics.

And really, one should and must make a distinction between Anglican eucharists and other services. How can attending an Anglican eucharist but not adoring the "sacrament" there be idolatry? Is attending Anglican Mattins and Evensong also idolatry?

I respectfully submit that you are being preposterous.

LatinTrad is simply stating a matter of doctrine. Anglican (Episcopal) priests have not been ordained by bishops who are part of the Apostolic succession; therefore, they are not empowered to consecrate the Eucharist.

Therefore, a worshipper at an Anglican church may very well receive the graces of a *spiritual* communion, but they are not receiving the Real Presence of Our Lord, as it is understood in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions.

No it's not a matter of doctrine. A sacrament may be invalid - a service may not. It's like saying "that was not a valid rosary prayer". I know quite well what the doctrine of Apostolic succession entails. I'm merely pointing out that he should have been more nuanced and precise in his statements. It is impossible for any service to be valid or invalid.

As for apostolic succession - there *are* Anglican clergy out there with valid (as the Latins understand it) orders who may well be confecting the sacrament.

You're missing the point entirely. I was pointing out imprecision in LatinTrad's rant, and how it could not be applied to all services. It is possible for their eucharist to be invalid, but a service cannot be judged valid or invalid. It is even sillier for him to apply that sort of statement to Anglican services in general, especially when no sacramental eucharist of any form is intended.

I'm surprised, Latins usually are better at logic and precision of terminology than Easterns.

Thank you for pointing out the imprecision of my rant. However, while I am at work there are times when I can only throw in little snippets.

What I meant was this: Anglican "eucharist" can never substitute for Sunday Mass, because it is (with 99% of their celebrants) invalid. To adore the "eucharist" at an invalid "mass" is an act of idolatry.

I hope I make myself clear.

Of course Evensong cannot be "invalid."

LatinTrad

Thanks, TG and KL.

Yes, but nobody, including the Anglicans, knows who they are anymore.

And apostolic succession is NOT just a "so what who cares" issue! Only the Apostles, and those who have been ordained by them and their successors, have been given the authority *by Christ* to (among other things) consecrate the Eucharist.

The *only* churches which we know FOR SURE have preserved a valid line of succession to the Apostles are the Catholic and the Orthodox.

We know from Christ Himself that we *must* receive His Body and His Blood. Why would you want to take a chance - "maybe it's valid or maybe it's not" - on something that is so vitally important?

Prayer services, like Vespers and Evensong, or any other form of prayer, is a different matter. It may be (probably is) quite all right to attend such a service. Certainly God hears all prayers.

However, here's an even better idea - how about encouraging more Catholic churches (and Eastern, if they don't already) to have more public devotional services such as Evening Prayers? I believe that's been discussed in other threads here, so it certainly isn't just a Latin issue.

I said an analogy would be difficult, so perhaps I shouldn't have used the Episcopal Church as an example, so rather then give my personal opinions, I'll just ask, Does the Ukrainian, Byzantine or any other Eastern Rite have an official policy covering parishioners moving to an area where there are no Eastern Rite Churches ? Alaska would be a prime example, very few Eastern Rite Churches, but numerous Orthodox and Latin Rite Catholic Churches.

Actually that's not quite true. I know several Anglican clergy in England who proudly show that their ordination included an Old Catholic bishop, who used the Old Catholic rite of ordination for them. My old college RC chaplain was a former Anglican priest and there was no doubt among the RCs when he was received that he was a valid priest because he had been ordained in such a way.

As a body, yes. But the Anglicans are a special case (and the Swedish Lutheran church may turn out to be another such special case, women bishops aside).

No-one's advocating taking a chance. My original post was to push for greater clarity and nuance in LatinTrad's post. Please don't read more into my post than I originally intended - knocking down straw men of one's own erection is a not a productive exercise for any party involved.

Slava Iesusu Christu!

To bring us back to the original question at hand, it is stated in the Roman Catholic Church's own documents and canons that the Orthodox churches possess valid apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist. So what's the problem with St Herman receiving said Mysteries from an Orthodox church, if his heart lies in the Eastern expression of faith? As our friend Michael has pointed out, it is the Orthodox churches that have excommunicated us, not the other way around; they are always welcome to receive in our Catholic churches.

What it falls down to is the old argument between the juridical "set definition" view that Latin theology espouses as opposed to the more abstract, intellectual way the (Byzantine) East thinks. The legalism that runs rampant in the West rears its ugly head once again, no personal offense intended.

That's the best thing I've seen written here in a long time. But I must point out that we used to have those in our Eastern churches, but due to the wonderful latinizing mindset pushed on us, we now have Saturday evening Divine Liturgies instead of Vespers services in most of our churches.

In Christ,
mikey.

Dear St Herman,
I too was raised as a Lutheran. And along with one of the other posts, I can not recommend what was recommended to you by Dan Laufer.
Attend and Orthodox Church if there are no Byzantine Churches in you area, I do that frequently while traveling myself even when there are Latin Parishes available, but join most assuredly not.
I have come to firmly believe in the absolute necessity of being in communion with the Apostolic See of Rome.
So attend yes, join no.

Stephanos I
Unworthy Monk and Arch sinner

Actually, some Episcopal parishes do have a valid Eucharist...I know of several Episcopal priests where were originally Roman Catholic priests Also some scholars are beginning to believe that the Papal declaration stating these orders were invalid was based on politics and not theology and could (should?) be reversed. Don

Greetings,
The issue of Anglican Orders is a very complex one. A blanket statement as to their validity or invalidity cannot be made.
The Papal documents treats the issue according the ordianal which excludes an idea of priesthood which is contrary to the faith of the Church (namely a sacrificial one) and therefore invalid, since then some other factors came into play. # 1 being the reintroduction of apostolic succession into the Anglican Church by Old Catholics of Utrecht.
Rome when receiving the Anglican Priests back into communion review each candidate individually and then makes a decission as to their validity or not.
Stephanos I

Dear Friends,

We've gone over this issue before, as many of us know.

Ultimately, I think the best thing would be to speak to one's priest, even if he is a long-distance one, and get a blessing to attempt anything like this.

Met. Andrew Sheptytsky DID approve of Eastern Catholics attending Orthodox services - but he gave his formal blessing for doing so.

When the mother of St Leonid Fyodorov the Hieromartyr became a Russian Catholic, her Polish priest-confessor absolutely forbade her from attending Orthodox services, kissing the Cross etc.

But when she met Andrew Sheptytsky, she told him of her heaviness of heart because of this prohibition.

"But why shouldn't you attend the services? the saintly Metropolitan replied. "And kissing the Cross etc. all these things are holy!"

So if I, for example, wanted to organize a parish trip to Jordanville, I would ask for permission and a blessing.

And once these were in hand (or "on hand"), it's "on the buses!"

Alex

Hello!
I am an Eastern Orhtodox Christian under the Archdiocese of Antioch. So what is the diference between the the bc litugry and the Orthodox litugry. OR is there any. So what are the main differences between the two.