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?

Well thanks very much!

Actually, my post above Denise's was not intended for you, or anyone specifically. You've not offended me at all.

Regarding the Apostolic Succession and valid Eucharist of the Orthodox Churches, I can offer to opposition to your point. I gladly concede that Orthodoxy has both these things. However, intercommunion is not allowed (especially for Catholics at Orthodox liturgies), so it would seem that a non-Orthodox would be left out of the most important part of the Liturgy. This is why I advocated attending the Roman Mass.

Also, it is not the opinion of everyone that the only thing separating Eastern Orthodoxy with Catholicism is politics. Some, including myself, believe there are serious theological and dogmatic issues to resolve, such as abortion, contraception, divorce, et al.

Logos Teen

There is no difference in the positions of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches as far as abortion is concerned. It is condemned by both traditions.

Brian,

I was under the impression that, under very strict circumstances such as the possibility of the mother's death or that of rape or incest, allowances were made.

From the OCA website regarding abortion:

Logos Teen

The Catholic Church allows abortion in certain etreme cases as well.

A medical procedure which saves a womans life yet, as an unwanted side effect, terminates a pregnancy is what the Latin's call 'double effect'. It is not direct abortion, therefore it is not equal in severity to murder.

In the case case of rape it gets more complicated. Acording to the US Conferance of Catholic bishops:

"Compassionate and understanding care should be given to a person who is the victim of sexual assault. Health care providers should cooperate with law enforcement officials and offer the person psychological and spiritual support as well as accurate medical information. A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum."

Ethical and Religious Directives
for Catholic Health Care Services,
Fourth Edition
Section three, paragraph 36

Herman,
You are very much mistaken! Abortion is NEVER allowed for ANY reason whatsoever.
Even in the case of eptoptic pregnancies or uterine cancer it is NEVER allowed to directly attack the foetus. You may under these circumstances treat the disease by chemotherapy for example even though the secondary but not intended result is the death of the foetus, as removal of the fallopian tube with the secondary but not intended death of the foetus.
There is a big difference.
Stephanos I

Logos Teen,
You are exactly right. I have a book put out by the Greek Orthodox Church of America and it teaches that in the case of rape or the threat of the loss of life to the mother abortion is permissible.

It is only the Catholic Church which absolutely defends the right to life of the foetus.
Stephanos I

I am not so sure about this. Certainly, I have never heard anything other than that abortion was always wrong in every circumstance, and I've done some reading outside of my own Church.

Although I cannot understand the rape clause, perhaps when they speak of abortion to save the life of the mother they mean something like the RC principle of double effect. I don't know. Whatever it is, a book put out by one Archdiocese (or a cleric/layperson of the Archdiocese?) could very well be wrong in this matter. But I don't think that automatically reflects on the Church as a whole, unless you have more official statements to offer (post-schism Orthodox councils, Synodal decrees, etc.).

Stephanos I:

Please re-read what I wrote. To use your analogy, if Chemotherapy saves a mother's life, it may as an unwanted side effect terminate a pregnancy (an indirect abortion). This is a bad thing, but it is an unintended side effect. This is different from direct abortion.

However, I also mentioned a seperate issue. The US Conferance of Catholic bishops have stated that, in the case of rape, the so-called 'morning after pill' may be used if conception has not already occurred. The "removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum" is forbiden.

Huh? Where did the USCCB say any such thing? This is completely against Catholic Church teaching. The "Morning After Pill" is artificial contraception as well as an abortifacient. Both are condemned by Catholic Teaching--see Huamnae Vitae and the CCC.

Baffled,

ZT

Ethical and Religious Directives
for Catholic Health Care Services,
Fourth Edition
Section three, paragraph 36

Here's the link. Its from there official website by the way.

http://www.nccbuscc.org/bishops/directives.htm

Zoe,

Regarding the "morning after pill"...

I don't know if St. Herman is interpreting this correctly, but if he is, here's my spin:

The key clause is "if fertilization has not occured." That is to say, if it has occured, then NO contraceptives, including the pill, are allowed to be taken. We must call to mind the reasoning behind prohibition of the pill. It is because it undermines the act of love between two people. However, rape is certainly not an act of love, rather an act of violence. Ergo, using the pill (if fertilization hasn't occured) in this situation would seem permissible because of the fact that there is no "unity" or "act of love" to undermine in the first place.

This is ONLY my amateur guess.

Logos Teen

Our friend St. Herman has received some good advice in answer to his question, and it has prompted some good discussions, however we are clearly off-topic. I invite posters to continue this or other discussions under a more appropriate heading.

Elias