www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall ACROD communion with Byzantines?

Someone on another thread mentioned that ACRODs (American Carpatho-Russyn Orthodox Diocese) Metropolitan Nicholas had decided that ACROD members could receive sacraments at the Byzantine Catholic Church if they lived in an area where there were no ACROD (and I assume no other Orthodox parishes) parishes.

Is that correct? If so, where is it in writing?

I think its a de facto arrangment: because of the close ethnic ties, people are willing to look the other way.

Orthodox Student

This sounds very weird.

Orthodox Christians are officially never allowed to take communion in non-orthodox parishes, no matter how close they are in ethnic ties to the Orthodox community. At the same time, specially in Western countries Orthodox are not allowed to give communion to non-orthodox.

There are cases when Orthodox give communion to Catholics but this is always unofficial and never officially approved by the Bishops. Even when the Patriarch of Constantinople isued a document accepting a cerain kind of intercommunion in extreme cases, this document was never enforced.

Intercommunion happens "de facto" all the time between the Antiochian Orthodox and the Melkite Greek Catholics in the Middle East. This is also because of the ethnic ties and the fact that so many have relatives in both Churches.

Dear Brian:

My aunt is Roman Catholic she went to Syria two or three years ago, she went with a group of Spaniards and Argentinians and as there was no Catholic parish, they went to an orthodox Church and received communion without any problems.

It does happen, for example, I know that in Barcelona there's a Serbian parish which have a group of Old-Latins who attend the Liturgy there and receive communion.

I still believe that in Western countries, the policy of not giving communion to non-Orthodox is right because there is no need for Catholics to receive the sacraments in the Orthodox Church since Catholicism has a lot of parishes, but I also think this must not be a matter of chauvinism against Western Christians and that exceptions can be made according to the directives of the EP and the other Patriarchates.

As you said, it is a matter of fact that in some Middle Eastern and European countries, Catholics are admited for communion in Orthodox parishes.
I believe somerules should be defined in order to separate the Church from chauvinist and anti-western feelings, but also to avoid indifferentism. Some intercommunion can be allowed according to the directives of the Patriarchs.

The principle for us Orthodox, I think, is for an allowance (economy) to be made to those we know. "Know" is a term of some discernment. An Antiochean Orthodox pastor may feel he knows the Melkite standing before him, he does not "know" the Roman.

I would guess this rubs many Catholics as "unjust" in lines with the western concepts of individual rights, in that a Catholic with equally the same beliefs and reverence is denied what another Catholic is allowed. But from an Orthodox stand point, it makes sense.

I would ask that Catholics have some sensitivity to this. I once was given the sad and awkward duty by my pastor to tell some Catholic vistors to cease presenting themselves for communion. While I tried my best to be kind about it, this couple have since refused to speak to me.


Axios

Metropolitan Nicholas spoke at last years Orientale Lumen Confrence at Catholic University in Washington, DC and his talk was published along with the others from this conference by Eastern Christian Publications.

Dear Jim:

In capsule, these are the guidelines for the reception of Communion by non-Catholic Christians in any Catholic Church (Roman or Byzantine):

General Rule:

Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches not yet fully united with the Catholic Church are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion.

Exceptions:

Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are allowed to receive communion in any Catholic Church,without the prior permission from the diocesan bishop. However, they are urged to respect the discipline of their own churches.

For Christians (like Anglicans, Lutherans, and other Protestant denominations) other than the above, prior permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of Canon Law is necessary before communion is granted.

This was the case for Prime Minister Tony Blair (Anglican) of the UK when he was allowed to receive Holy Communion from the Holy Father when he was invited to attend a private Mass offered by the Pope during his visit to the Vatican last Feb. 22nd. The dispensation was granted by the Cardinal Prefect of the Secretariat of State. (BTW, Tony Blair's wife and all their children are Catholic.)

AmdG

So the Eucharist is now seen as a matter of ethnic tides and not of unity in faith.

I wonder if this story is true.

This sounds lots like Phyletism in its modernistic expresion. And Metropolitan Nicholas Diocese is part of the Patiarchate of Constantinople

The principle for us Orthodox, I think, is for an allowance (economy) to be made to those we know. "Know" is a term of some discernment. An Antiochean Orthodox pastor may feel he knows the Melkite standing before him, he does not "know" the Roman.

Um well according to this way of thinking I suppose there's nothing wrong to take communion in a RC parish, after all I share more ethnic tides with them than with Serbs or Russians and priests here know thwm very well. :p

Let me try to make my point again. It would be normative and canonical for someone to be Orthodox (using the common meaning of that term) to receive the Eucharist. No one else has a "right" (to use a western term) to the Eucharist. Exceptions (economy) might occur, but they are not normative and not a matter of right. Their is no obligation of this economy being extended with rigourous evenhandedness or without "discrimination" (to use antoher westernism).

The priest makes a human judgement. This judgement requires some knowledge of the person. A person well known to the priest might be allowed to receive and a person not know, but whose personall holiness, orthodoxy and fittingness is no less than the other, would not be allowed.

Obviously, the priest's human limitations in making this judgement might put at an advantage persons he knows by family ties, social ties, ethnic ties, cultural ties, etc.

I don't see what is wrong or surprising about this.

Axios

The minimal objective standard that presbyters should not take upon themselves to breach:

Is the bishop of the person who presents himself or herself for communion in full and public communion with the bishop over the parish where this person has approached the chalice?

Yes or No.

There's no bending on that principle amongst the Orthodox clergy whose judgement I respect.

After that, we get into issues of improper preparation, periods of penance or uncleanliness, or other issues that should preclude receiving the eucharist. These other issues are often within the purview of the local presbyter.

But then again, it's "only" the body and blood of Christ, so why should we worry about all of this?????

Communion should be considered very serious business.

In Christ,
Andrew.

Am I reading this correctly?

Those of us who are Byzantine Catholic Ruthenian and the ACROD are taking the first baby steps toward the unity of Christianity???

Or maybe I'm too optimistic???

Somebody has to have the guts to work for unity!! I think Our Lord would be proud of Met. Nicholas.

I love to be optimistic! We live in historic times!
:p

I love your attitude.

Michael

Several years ago Bishop Vsevelod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church led a procession from his cathedral in Chicago a few blocks to St. Nicholas Ukrainian Catholic Cathedral with relics of St. Nicholas which Kyr Vsevelod personally presented to Bishop Michael Wiwchar.

Kyr Vsevelod is also a regular participant in the Orientale Lumen conferences and often comes for Greek Catholic functions in Chicago. He was also a member of the Kyivan Church Study Group composed of Orthodox and Greek Catholic scholars.

May God continue to bless men like Kyr Vsevelod and Nicholas who continue to work for unity and are often accused by their own people as well as anti-ecumenical Catholics.

No one has answered Jim's original question:

Is it official?

Is it in writing?

I'll answer it in this way: Were it official and were it in writing, Metropolitan Nicholas would probably find himself:

(a) warned to revoke the policy immediately by his Patriarch, the Archbishop of Constantinople. And if he failed to do so, then

(b) removed from SCOBA (Standing Conference of Bishops in the Americas) and possibly deposed by his Patriarch.

This is not an issue to be resolved through the back door. These things must be done openly and with the concurrence of the appropriate synod of his brother bishops.

In Christ,
Andrew