www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization ByzanTEEN the east and the west

to all of you, pax et bonum! (peace and good)
what do you think will be the bridge in uniting the eastern rite and the western rite?

Humility.

The Blessed Virgin Mary, Most Holy Theotokos.

Christians always come home to their mother.

Paul

I'll go out on a limb here. I think the Eastern Catholic Churches serving our Lord in love and humility - who understand "both worlds" of Catholicism can be a bridge. The EC churches provide a contemporary model of how the Church operated prior to the Great Schism. God uses the weak things to confound the mighty; the Byzantine church has been derided by the EO for compromising with Rome ("uniate") and her unique identity somewhat hidden in the shadow of Rome ("latinized"). I think the move by the pope to encourage the EC's to rediscover/recover their heritage/distinctives is wonderful. I think concerns of the Eastern Churches involve not being totally absorbed and micro-managed by the West - they've been looking at the BC to see how all of this unfolds.

Our Lord's Prayer is that we may be one. All unity must be based on a humble submission to God's will. He is the Head and Saviour of the Body. There is already a spiritual unity - the one Holy Spirit is "breathed in" by both lungs of the Church. Many practical aspects of unity are already taking place - especially in areas of shared outreach/ministry to those in need in our communities. Recognizing their similar heritage/rite, some EO/EC groups have shared buildings - especially when establishing a mission. I think some very practical initiatives could go far in helping to encourage unity. For example, include in the prayers at services the church patriarchs/bishops/leaders of sister churches (united and separated). Celebrate the Pascha at the same time; it's wonderful when Western/Eastern celebration time coincides (not this year) - a foretaste of what it could/should be like EVERY year.

Our family attends a local Roman Catholic church; I have not become a member. We do not receive the Eucharist, but go up and receive a blessing (still not comfortable receiving a blessing from a Eucharistic minister instead of a priest). I went to the Good Friday and Easter vigil services. I was there and saw many baptisms and confirmations! A great sadness came over me - another year and still not in the Catholic Church (West or East). Then I wondered, do people have this kind of sadness - another year and the Church is still divided? The Jewish people say "Next year - in Jerusalem!" at the end of the Passover seder. Perhaps a similar exclamation would be appropriate at the conclusion of our major feasts as a reminder and longing for an undivided church.

Just some observations from an "outsider" who has seen enough of both sides in order to love them and enough of both sides to not know which one he'll call "home" here below. Pray for me.

In Christ' love,


Woody

Shlomo Bro. Francis Mary,

I think the best bridge between East in West will be those of us Easterns from non-Byzantine Traditions. We have never had the Imperial Tradition of the Romans (both Latin and Byzantine), and therefore we do not have the hubris that inhabits those two Churches.

As we slowly merge together, we can show that by following Christ will; "So all may be One", we give example to the love that Christ has for us all.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

P.S. To the Group,

My new avatar is a traditional Syriac Icon of Mar Ephrem.

In addition to what I've already written, I offer the following "sweet and sour" answer for your consideration.

SILLY:

Ah - of course - how could I have missed it? The OBVIOUS bridge between the West and the East is REV. JESSE JACKSON! Both sides know this, but have been quite stubborn and recalcitrant in making one simple phone call�

Hey -what we're talking about is not only a healing of the 1000 year rift, but BETTER WAGES FOR PRIESTS (and health care)! It may require the formation of a UNION�

(I think Dr. Phil could help get this all "out in the open", too)


SERIOUS:

It will be either repentance now or persecution, followed by repentance later. Is that blunt enough? I think the Lord loves the Church too much to let this continue much longer. Observe how He spoke to the 7 Churches in the book of Revelation. We'll always drag our feet when we think we have the "luxury" of passing this along to the next generation. Question: If I, as an individual, am commanded to leave my gift and reconcile with a brother who has something against me before offering my gift - BY COMMAND OF OUR LORD (i.e. "NOT optional") - how is it that two major Christian groups can continue to go through all the correct forms of worship and neglect this?


Woody

It will happen when the sin of pride wanes and the desire to do the work of the Lord prevails.

Both sides of this issue are guilty.

When the Pope abandons Ostpolitik and consecrates Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary EXACTLY as requested at Fatima.
Keep in mind, Our Lady PROMISED THE CONVERSION OF RUSSIA TO THE CATHOLIC FAITH after consecration. I.E. The leader of the Orthodox world will become Catholic!!

.....I don't understand Brother Francis Mary's comment that since Latins and Byzantines have an "Imperial Tradition" we are plagued with hubris. The Latins, for one thing, are the furthest thing from Imperialists at this point. Moreover, most of the Orthodox have the same "Imperial Tradition" of the Byzantines.

The other Eastern Churches are more than special in Christ's eyes. There is no need to slap the venerable traditions of Latins and Byzantines around.

OUAM,

Welcome to the Forum, I think. If you decide to let go of the Father Gruner interpretation of Fatima, let us know; it's not a particularly popular one here. Russia has been consecrated and is a Christian nation, albeit predominantly Orthodox - and that's just fine.

Perhaps you failed to notice that Orthodoxy is a respected Faith among we denizens of the East and Orient who gather here, as it presumably is with our Latin, Protestant, and Muslim brethren who are interested enough to be here with us. In fact, you might want to consider the fact that the Easterners and Orientals here are not all Catholics - many are Orthodox and we and they are equal and beloved partners in a common hope that the day will soon come when we are truly "One", Holy, Catholic and Orthodox, Apostolic Church.

A bus, bearing a banner that reads "Catholic Triumphalism", seems to have pulled into this berth recently and disgorged any number of persons who are convinced that their outlook and those of Eastern and Oriental Catholics are more than merely consonant - that they are synonymous and that the synchronicity excludes or looks askance at Orthodoxy as a lesser Church. Let me give you a hint, that's not us!

Many years,

Neil, who is not feeling particularly charitable about the need to address this nonsense, but has seen it building for weeks and is tired of it.

I also just realize that Brother Francis Mary posted this in the ByzanTeen Forum - suggesting that he was seeking the opinions of our youth on his query. Looking at those who've responded, the definition of "teen" has apparently s t r e t c h e d somewhat :rolleyes:

I'm new here so if I do something against protocal please let me know. I'm 66 years a Roman Catholic, former seminarian, an isolate tertiary of the Carmelite Third Order for thirty years, and a former Master of Formation. If anyone thinks there is a deficiency in the Orthodox religions...that person hasn't studied and researched his/her facts. The Orthodox history is RICH with many spiritual traditions and practices that my church would do well to avail itself. Take a look at the Philokalia if you doubt me.

Dear Obediens,

The matter of the Consecration of Russia has been settled once and for all, according to the Vatican.

Where in the messages of Fatima was it EVER stated that Orthodoxy will come under Rome if the Consecration is done etc.?

It talked about CONVERSION and Catholic Triumphalists assumed that means conversion to Catholicism.

There is another kind of conversion, a conversion of heart in Christ.

And the Orthodox peoples of the former Soviet Union are certainly engaging in the latter form.

And in a way that puts Western Christians, including Catholic Triumphalists with their agendas, to shame.

Alex the Papalist

The same person who told us about the Fatima apparitions in the first place - +Sister Lucia+ - ALSO told us that the consecration had been done correctly. So don't panic.

but has seen it building for weeks and is tired of it.
Patience my good friend.

Our first stance is always what someone else taught to us... being in here with so many from the various churches share a meal - will have its effects. An overly zealous dedication to what one thinks is the Roman Catholic church (and is not) is no more irritating than an overly jealous dislike of what someone else may think is the Roman Catholic church (and is not).

The heart is good - it has just been trained badly by someone else.

-ray

Dear obediensusqueadmortem�

This is an usual interpretation.

The most popular Roman Catholic interpretation has been that the conversion would be a conversion from Godless Communism (which did take place).

The Catholic faith is shared by dozens of particular churches which are all part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. That includes Eastern Catholics (of which the Byzantine is one) and Orthodox and Oriental and Occidental churches and many more which I can not give their names for lack of memory.

There are about 22 of these churches in full ecclesiastical union with Rome. And I am not sure how many are not in full ecclesiastical union but some form of partial, or maybe in some form of reconciliation - and some are not in union on an ecclesiastical level and I do not know how many that is � and well - it is all rather confusing. But all that really does not matter to the rank and file Roman Catholic. I will explain that below.

The Orthodox (since the Russian Orthodox was mentioned) is also Catholic churches - but not Roman Catholic churches (Latin Church) � and that is fine and that is how the apostles set things up.

Example�
http://www.orthodoxcatholicchurch.org/
http://www.rocmas.org/

Note the 5th and 6th line down�
http://www.mospat.ru/text/e_principles/id/5547.html
�One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church�

and there is some disagreements on how to express a few points of theology - and disagreements on the universal authority of the Patriarch of Rome in relation to other Patriarchs. Since there is a disagreement between some Orthodox and Rome on that particular subject - it is mostly avoided by both side of the hierarchy. Despite some occasional rhetoric - both sides have been careful not to bring about a situation where - an full breach of this protocol would take place (that is my opinion).

The Orthodox stress the colligate nature of the Bishop of Rome (which nature is true). The Pope of Rome is equal to other Popes and Patriarch Bishops. That is entirely true and that is how they treat him. All is proper there.

It is (according to Roman Catholic doctrine) mandatory that a Roman Catholic believe that the See of Peter is such an office as to have some universal authority over the entire church - but if you read that doctrine carefully - it is not mandatory or of obligation that all other churches believe or consent to that. The doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church on that matter is doctrine for member of the Roman Catholic church. As far as I know and can tell - no obligation was laid on any other church to consent to that Roman Catholic doctrine as written - in that regard. The position is - voluntary (as the word honor implies) on behalf of any other Patriarch. The Roman Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Roman Bishop - is a doctrine declared to - the Roman Catholic membership�. So we Roman Catholics must believe it - I do not believe it was put upon all other churches universally � Now if what I just said is entirely true or not - it almost does not matter - because you and I (normal rank and file members) have no authority nor ability - to figure it all out. We (as ordinary members of our particular church) are not responsible for the right or wrong of it - nor will you or I every be called upon by the church - to decided matters. If your ARE a priest or Bishop in the Roman Catholic Church - you may have a responsibility to teach it - but as a normal laity - you have only the responsibility to - believe it - and abide by it yourself - and nothing further.

As Roman Catholics of the Latin Rite (and I am) you and I can faithfully believe the doctrine (universal authority of the See of Rome) with all our hearts - yet - it does not interfere nor even really have a practical application for us when dealing with our brothers from other churches. Each member of each particular church is under their own bishop and what their own bishop requires and teaches. This is true of Orthodox as well as Roman Catholic - and so on a practical level - the bishops up above can �fight it out� if they want to - we Roman Catholics laity are under no obligation to fight it out - clear it up - or convince anyone else - on the matter. And we tried (beyond discussion) we world be trying to breaking the obedience of an Orthodox with his own bishop - and neither you nor I have the authority to do that nor the command nor even the suggestion from Rome - to do that. It is essentially (as laity) none of our business what other bishops have obligated on their own members.

The concept of the Patriarch of Moscow (head of the Russian Orthodox Church) being converted to Roman Catholic - is an impossibility. Just as impossible and the Pope of Rome converting to place himself under any other Patriarch. It just can not happen in the way the apostles laid the foundation of the entire Church.

The entire Catholic church is composed of several churches (particular churches) and there are �levels� to that.

(someone help me out - what are there 12 major patriarchies??)

In any event - these are entirely independent churches - founded by the apostles - each with their own head. The do not �merge� like corporations on the stock market. Each is independent and not subject to another Patriarch.

The church is very much like a hologram - each piece contains the whole. And the whole contains each piece.

Each particular Rite and the particular churches in that Rite - have all seven Sacraments and a valid Liturgy (or Mass) and priesthood and hierarchical structure of authority.

The Position of the Pope of Rome (by the way - several of them are called Popes and not just the Roman Bishop) - according to Roman Catholic doctrine) has a limited universal authority - on certain occasions and on a limited range of matters. Each church has its own developed set of cannon laws (how the church is managed) and I believe that the Roman Pope has no authority over any other church cannon (cannon is not a matter of theology or faith - but practical organizational management). If some particular Patriarch decided that he need not abide by the Roman doctrine of Papal infallibility - that is up to him - and - such a decline to honor it - is entirely a matter between the hierarchy. In a big way - it is not a matter for the rank and file members of each church. We simple do and believe as guided by our own Patriarch - and we are �in the clear� - the repercussions of God rest on them - not us - who are required to believe and follow our own church doctrine as set forth by those placed in authority above us.

My own particular interpretation of Fatima as regards Russia - is that the Communists originally intended to wipe out the entire Christianity of Russia - and it failed - the Catholic church (Russian Orthodox Catholic church) survived - Communism (while not dropping their guns and running off to church) changed their minds. Converted from �kill them all� to �tolerate them�.

The interpretation of visions and locutions of apparitions and saints - is a difficult thing. While individual member of the church do their varied interpretations - the magisterial of the church seldom does their own interpretation and has never made it a requirement to believe even their own opinion on interpretation. Private revelation is not a matter which the church require us to believe - and not a matter which the church feels she needs to interpret. The church has officially allowed private and public veneration of Fatima - but you will note that there is not one word of Fatima in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It remains a private revelation which is open to interpretation and the church has not endorced any particular interpretation of it beyond the need for repentance and prayer - which was already part of the gospel message.

-ray