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

Arturo,

I am SO glad to hear about this holy monk!!!

Many prayers going out to you as you explore your monastic vocation!

Glory to Jesus Christ!

The most pro-Catholic Orthodox priest I have ever met was a ROCOR archimandrite whose name I will not mention. He is in a sense my spiritual "grandfather" since he is the first real monk I have ever met (it should be pointed out that I met him in a Latin traditionalist retreat center I used to live in when he came for a visit). In his cell, there is a Latin statue of the Virgin Mary, along with another image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, and an icon of St. Teresa of Avila. Everyone in the ROCOR knows about his tendencies, but no one can touch him since he has been a monk for so long. (He has told me that he was a monk on Mt. Athos and even met Thomas Merton). In him, I perceive that there is a simplicity about his faith that excludes all zealotry or fanaticism.
If something is holy, it is holy...period!
Sometimes I feel that, among Eastern Christians, both Catholics and Orthodox, there is too much appeal to style, to what is spiritually and theologically "chique". The Western captivity has been so severe, according to some, that all things Western should be shunned, and the Easternizing thought police is callled in to purge all foreign elements. This I think was the main error of Vladimir Lossky in particular, and the particular sin that the ROCOR has fallen into. They theologize by knee jerk, and I am finding that I suffer from this same defect as well, even if I am the poor Latin-turned-Byzantine that I am. But where is the Christian freedom in all this? Do Orthodoxy and the Patristic mentality depend on exteriors and a certain lingo? All of this give me pause.

Then I think of my ROCOR hieromonk spiritual "grandfather", who has this child-like freedom to adopt something because "it's pretty". For him, it seems, there is no East and West, only the Kingdom of God that is promised to the poor in spirit. Sure, he is no syncretist, but neither does he think that the human adventure with God can be exclusionary; God has no respect for spiritualities and theological schools, nor for Synods and jurisdicitions.

So the ROCOR is not all lost. There are some who act the way they should.

Arturo

I hope my attempt at honesty doesn't offend but may help prevent others from making mistakes that not only cause scandal but can weaken the faith of their parish church.

I know several Eastern Catholics who joined the evangelical protestants. They claimed that their Eastern Catholic Priest did not give them Bible studies which they had requested, so they started searching for different protestant Bible studies; however, this Priest gave excellent sermons. Some ex-members even went over to Lebanon and Russia to convert the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Christians to protestantism. From that same parish, during that same time, a number of parishioners joined the Orthodox Church. It seemed that all these people were afraid of latinizations and were seeking a deeper spirituality than their pastor could provide. Pray that this situation has been remedied.

On the other hand, I have known several Orthodox who have gone over to Catholicism. Some have done so after reading Scott Hahn's books, especially over the birth control issue. Others dislike the fasting requirements of the Eastern Churches (over half the year) and don't understand the need for prayer and fasting. Others say that an Orthodox parish is too far away (three hours or more round trip). Still others rebel over the "ethnicity" of their particular Orthodox Church. Finally, one of the biggest temptations is the local Catholic school, where membership in that Roman Catholic parish brings a drop in the tuition rates. Both Byzantine Catholics and Orthodox Christians "convert" to get these lower rates. The Byzantine Bishops have tried to address this issue.

I think that most of these people who have changed churches lacked a spirit of repentance and were seeking greener pastures elsewhere. It's so easy to blame someone else; however, we tend to take our problems with us. I speak from my own experience.

Here's another true example: a person left the Orthodox Church because she had too many marriages (three); therefore, she could not marry again. In addition, the Orthodox Priest had penanced her and she could not receive Holy Communion. However, in the Catholic church she was able to get all her past marriages annulled and was allowed to remarry and receive Holy Communion.

Do you see the potential problems here? Will people learn from their mistakes by fleeing?

Let us focus on Christ our God, that we may be saved.

Yours in Christ our God,
Elizabeth Maria

Elizabeth,

Sad comment that it is, but I think there are probably few here who haven't encountered these things - whether it be the person who finds his or her own Church "too churchy" or "not churchy enough", to put it crudely.

I think a couple things that Arturo said should be guiding principles for us all to remember:

Many years,

Neil

We must start seeing Christ within each other.

"Whatsoever you did to the least of My brethren, that you did unto Me." -- Matt.25

O Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us and save us.

Arturo,
Think of the example of that monk and of the holy examples of Father Lev Gillet and Mother Maria Skobtsova of Paris (of Blessed Memory) who sought to integrate within themselves all that was holy in the East and West. This, to me, is the hope for union of our Churches. Those people and their holy prayers will break down the barriers of our polemics.

Peace and Love to you on this Nativity!!!!!!!!

CHRIST IS BORN! GLORIFY HIM!

Father Gregory, sir, (I'd prefer NOT to be called Sire Daniel, Lord is FAR above my rank.)

It took me a long time to respond to this because whenever I ask these questions I get accused of being offensive to the Orthodox, which I assure you is not my intent. (I've always found you to be most respectful Daniel.)

However your answer only raises questions. For one, the claims of Rome are based on very arguably valid Scriptural and Patristic evidence. What Scriptural and Patristic arguments exist for the Ecumenical Patriarch being the center of unity? Or is this merely a political and historical accident? (I was NOT suggesting a Phanar based claim like Rome's...but rather simply that since the Ecumenical Patriarch is the Eastern 'first-among-equals' that often we use this as a marker.) P.S. We certainly could debate the 'Scriptural and patristic evidence' for some time...but let us not go there now.

Secondly, you state that there are those jurisdictions that are not in communion with the EP but which are somehow still canonical. I don't understand then what makes one canonical; you seem to contradict your standards of canonicity. (I was merely stating that there are brief times and sometimes longer periods when some Churches have broken communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and yet this does not mean that they are not canonical Churches. Simple.)

If you are Roman or Greek Catholic or Oriental Catholic, I personally feel that it would be most proper for you to follow the teaching of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II in his Ut Unum Sint That They May Be One (John Paul II, 5/25/95). Many Orthodox Churches that we do not consider canonical are recognized as so by Rome. You might want to go with that as a bench marker?

In Him Who is Born for our salvation,
+Father Archimandrite Gregory

Dear Father, yes, I guess it is a Benedictine thing to be known as "dom" ["lord"]. Sorry.
Personally I consider, with Rome, anyone in apostolic succession who confesses the faith of the first millenium to qualify as Orthodox. I have long been puzzled by Orthodox criteria, though.
And continue to be, I might add.

And Father, I deliberatly used restrained language to describe Rome's claims of primacy: "at least arguably valid". Certainly I find them convincing, as have multitudes throughout Christian history, but it was not my intention to open that topic for debate. I may have you confused with someone else, but I seem to recall you making a personal reference which led me to believe that you were once a Roman Catholic. If so, you obviously somewhere along the way did not find the case convincing. But there is a case and it is at least arguable. On the other hand any argument I have seen for Constantinople being the locus of unity seemed rooted more in political history than divine Tradition, let alone Scripture: Constantinople was the capitol of the Byzantine Roman Empire. On the other hand, if St Peter had remained in Antioch his patriarchate would still be the center of unity [the Antiochian Catholic Church?] Now obviously there are degrees of catholicity. Some lone ranger who has been [according to Roman standards] validly consecrated but who is in communion with only a handful- or fewer- bishops would be in a more diminished union with the wider Church than one of the "canonical" bishops who is in communion with the majority of Orthodox throughout the world. However a Catholic would still recognize the validity of his sacraments, assuming he professes the Apostolic Faith.

Teen:

Christ is Born!

The path to an Apostolic Church, whether Rome or the autocephalic Orthodox Churches or the Oriental Ortodox, is a journey that takes time. No one with a smattering of theological training would tell you that you must have some urgent sense to receive the Mysteries, however there is an obligation incumbent upon those who know the Truth to enter the Church's organic unity following the canonical processes of the Church. You are aware that you are already imperfectly united as a western Christian to the Latin Church sui juris through your baptism? All protestant ecclesial communities that believe in the Trinity and use the Trinitarian form in baptism initiate their followers into the Catholic Church, according to Catholic sacramental theology; in other words a properly performed baptism is Catholic baptism even though it is performed by a protestant minister. There is no such thing really as a protestant baptism - there is only baptism into the Church, the Catholic Church, One, Holy and Apostolic. So you are a Catholic not only by virtue of your baptism, but also in virtue of your intention to eventually unite with the Church, which you see as Christ's. All that is needed is to either work through the normal parish RCIA or through the traditional formation in a old Rite Latin parish. All that is needed from you is a profession of faith really, and in the old Rite you will receive the rites from the ritual of baptism that you did not receive previously, profession of faith, confession, and Eucharist and Confirmation when the Bishop comes.

So Teen you are already Catholic by virute of your baptism; you just need the Grace of the Catholic Church to fill in that which is lacking and voila! Again, however according to the traditional teaching of the Church if you know the truth of the Catholic Church and do not enter and die refusing, for whatever reason, to be joined in organic communion then you will be accountable of the day of judgement for that obstinancy. And I am sure you are aware that I have not used the verbage of the Fathers and Saints regarding this issue; just buy Denziger and you will know what I mean, brother. But I feel you are aware of this, already. So may God be with you in your journey into the Apostolic Church.

In Christ,


Robert Horvath

Dear Robert,

Thanks for the well-wishing.

Yes. However, it's questionable whether I've actually been baptized. My mother can't recall if the minister dipped his hand in the water and then laid it on my head, or if he actually poured the water from the seashell over my head. Both practices are used in the United Methodist Church, and I've personally seen both used. I guess the thing to do would be to call the pastor who officiated at my [possible] baptism and inquire as to his methods. My RCIA instructor advised me to talk about it with Father Paul, the priest at the Catholic church into which I'm being received (which is a Novus Ordo, err..Mass of Paul VI parish).

You know, I was going to be received in the old rite at the Tridentine parish a little over an hour away from my house. What really held me back was that the priest at that parish is French and it's terribly hard for me to understand him through his thick accent. I know, I know; a pathetic reason, but I thought it would cause a lot of confusion if I couldn't understand what he was saying half the time. I guess I could've spoken to the parochial vicar, who is apparently American and thus speaks perfect* English.

Oh yes, I definitely understand this. However, perhaps you could help me with something I don't understand.

I can see how this works in theory, but not in reality. Who in his right mind, while acknowledging the Catholic Faith as the True Faith and necessary for salvation, would refuse to enter the Church? This amounts to acknowledging and recognizing that one is sending oneself to Hell. Who would do this? The clear answer to me would seem to be: no one. Case in point: I recognize that if I refused to enter the Catholic Church while being convinced of her Truth, I could never attain salvation. So, naturally, I'm converting to the Church! Hopefully I'm making my point clear.

Logos Teen

*According to some Grammar Nazis on some other threads, American English is, perhaps, incorrect after all.

Teen - Grammar Nazis. Oh how unkind

I'm sobbling great big tears now I just appreciate language being used correctly and not this dreafully sloppy careless stuff that frequently does not even make sense.

Have you seen some of the rubbish put out by the so-called

Clear English Campaign folk - it would make your hair curl and stand on end at the same time.

Clear simple understandable English is what is needed.

But I have to admith that ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put .

Anhelyna,

Oh, I'm just kidding. I'm a bit of a Grammar Nazi myself. I can be quite the stickler for proper English.

Ain't that right, y'all?

Logos Teen

Christ is Born! Glorify Him!

Dear Teen:

What a great joy that you are entering the Catholic Church finally! May God be with you on your journey. And from a pastoral persective I think it is good that you are entering the Church through the normative Rites as Revised as per the Second Vatican Council, because this Rite is the majority one used and if for whatver reason you were in a place that did not have a traditional Mass (whatever that means) you would feel at home in the New (Not-So New) Liturgy and Sacraments.

Regarding your baptism: United Methodist baptism is regarded as canonically valid in this country unless there is proof that the trinitarian formula was not used such as in the case of: I baptise you in the Name of the Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier (Such as what the feminists et al use to avoid patriarchal terms for Deity). But if no baptismal record can be procured: all that is needed is witness testimony in writing. If that cannot be done than I would think from a pastoral POV the presbyter should conditionally baptize you, but again that is up to him, ok.

Remember RCIA is not mean't to be a Freshman College theology course, it is the bare basics and is geared toward protestants usually so it seems watered down, but in reality is just tailored for those who know next to nothing about the Church. And of course there are cases of people teaching the class who are ignorant of their own religion, just ignore their ignorance and treat them with respect and understanding.

I am glad that you are aware that there is a necessity for entering the Church for those who know it is true. May God bless you for that and keep you on the straight path. Amin.

Don't let Satan lead you away for whatever reason! Now is the time to fight him with all you've got, ok. Remember that Christ loves you and pray the rosary often and maybe an akathist too

Your friend in Christ,

Robert