www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Byzantine Catholics identifying themselves as Orthodox?

He was restored by IV Constantinople which condemned the Filioque. Rome later repudiated this council. It is referred to as "Pseudosynodus Photiana" in the New Advent Encyclopedia.

He died with the knowledge that a valid council had backed up the earlier tradition of the church that the creed could not be changed. That is why he is considered one of the three pillars of Orthodoxy.

Can you give examples of this? From what I have read and been told by an Orthodox bishop and many priests, there is no intercommunion in the Orthodox church. Period.

Marie,

I typically identify myself as Greek Catholic. That is the term I prefer. That way, most people understand I am Catholic, in union with the Pope, and Eastern rite.

Greek Catholic also is a cherished appellation for me, because Empress Theresa Maria of Hungary, a staunch advocate of our spiritual forbears, designated our Churches as such in order to distinguish us from the Roman Catholics.

I have no problem with the term Orthodox; I feel I have a right to it since our Churches share the patrimony with the Eastern Orthodox Churches and since as others have pointed out, Orthodox means right worship/belief, and is used liturgically for our Churches. My understanding is that Studites and others call themselves Orthodox-Catholic, again, a term I have no problem with. St. Peter Mohila uses the term Orthodox-Catholic in his Confession of Faith.

We Greek Catholics are most successful in our practice when our worship and practice is thoroughly Orthodox. The only way someone should be able to tell that they are in a Ukrainian or Ruthenian Catholic Byzantine Church rather than a Russian or Ukrainian Orthodox Church, is that we mention the Pope in our litanies, and we have a picture of Benedict XVI on the entry way of our Church.

Nevertheless, out of respect for Eastern Orthodox, and to avoid confusion, I use Greek Catholic.

I also by the way have no trouble being called a Uniate (even though it has become a pejorative for us)- because I am! I am a Christian in union with the Pope!

Blessings,

Lance

Father Chrysostom Frank mentions some specific examples here:

http://www.unitypublishing.com/Newsletter/OrthodoxCatholic.htm

I am also told, for instance, that intercommunion between Orthodox and Greek-Catholics is quite a common practice in the Patriarchate(s) of Antioch - at least outside of North America.

I have heard of other occasions where even hierarchs invited Greek-Catholics to receive communion. Others may be able to cite examples...for myself, I need to hit the hay! It is 1:00am here!

God bless,

Gordo

I'm Latin Rite Catholic, and I wouldn't have a problem calling myself Orthodox! All Catholics, regardless of rite, are Orthodox. And from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, they see themselves as Catholic, too. Let's play name-switch for a millenium and y'all be Catholic and we'll be Orthodox, since we both think we're already both anyway!

Alexis

Well, I would opt for calling myself Apostolic but that opens up a whole new can of worms down here in the South! (actually, it opens up a can of snakes in some parts)

Joe

This came up with the Ukrainian Church in Canada recently for example, and the new Metropolitan there came out and said some of the laxity would have to end. There was a thread about this.

Overall there is of course no systematic mechanism of intercommunion, since intercommunion itself does not make sense as an idea within Orthodoxy from an ecclesiological standpoint. Communion is above all else the fullest expression of participation in the church and its assent to its belief. That is the rule, and like any rule, an individual priest or bishop can exercise ekonomia. That of course would certainly usually indicate exceptional circumstances of which I think we could think of a few potenetial cases where ekonomia makes sense. Where ekonomia extends to "normal" circumstances, then I think poor theological thinking is at work, even if intentions are good.

It is the nature of communion that made me ask my question on the first page, I simply cannot fathom why someone who is not Orthodox and not considering joining the church would consider taking communion in the church. By the same token I cannot fathom why people who are baptized and chrismated show up once or twice a year and still receive. In my own experience, I recently voluntarily gave up receiving for about three months while struggling with issues of doubt. I felt like without giving my assent to the teaching of the church, it would simply be a mistake to commune. It was only when I exited this period that I felt like I could participate again.

I have mixed feelings about inter-communion; on one hand, I am sympathetic to the idea that all Apostolic Churches should be able to commune together, since we all have valid orders and sacraments, and share belief in the Real Presence of the Lord's Body & Blood. But this sentiment of mine is actually a Catholic perspective.

I think as painful as it is for our Apostolic Churches to be divided, we should view shared Eucharist as the reward and culmination of a unity of faith, faithfully pursued, rather than a means to it. I think God will honor us for our efforts in being faithful and seeking unity on the basis of coming to agreement in matters of faith.

Blessings,

Lance

Well, I agree with him, because the petrine ministry is intregal to the office of any bishop, but that's a different story...

I was referring more to the ecumenical councils question, or more importantly, the point behind it. I believe the statement of Cardinal Ratzinger is the accurate one.

To the first part of the statement I highlighted, I can only assume that some people feel that communion is communion no matter what church it is. While they can hold to that opinion, it certainly is not shared by the hierarchs of either the Catholic or Orthodox churches. The eucharist is the fullness of the church. Those who belong and regularly partake are affirming their belief in the church they belong to.

Marching up to the chalice isn't just part of the ritual of going to church. It IS the church. If legitimate economia with the permission of a hierarch is applied that's one thing. A lax priest is another. Until full unity is restored ther is no such thing as "open" communion. (At least on the part of the Orthodox)

I fully realize that if I'm in a Greek or Roman Catholic church I can receive communion no questions asked. However, I would never partake because my conscience wouldn't allow it, and I certainly know the Orthodox church forbids it.

Also as far as the Orthodox, people who only receive once or twice a year are not considered "practicing" Orthodox. After a long lapse, reconciliation is required to partake again and be considered a practicing Orthodox christian.

Lance,

Intercommunion in all Apostolic Churches is a Catholic idea? That's news to me.

Alexis

I can't help but think Satan chuckles every time Apostolic Christians argue with each other about who can commune where and under what circumstances. What a terrible scandal that we share the deposit of faith and valid sacraments and yet would essentially use as a political weapon the greatest gift Our Lord gave to us: His Body and Blood.

As a Greek Catholic, I was honoured to receive from an Orthodox priest when I was in Afghanistan 2001-2002 and the only priest-chaplain in our part of the country was OCA. Sad when it takes a war on the other side of the world to accomplish what I'm inclined to think in my heart is Christ's will.

A clear case of economia. Glad you were able to receive.

But this is precisely the issue, neither Rome nor the Orthodox are convinced that way share exactly the same deposit of faith.

Joe

Hypothetically maybe he laughs when any Christians argue about this, not just "Apostolic Christians" which is a rather loosely defined term. What's to say a Lutheran who recites the creed and believes in some form of the real presence shouldn't receive at a Catholic mass? Or that anybody who expresses a desire to receive should no matter what?

We all draw our lines somewhere, and hopefully for good reasons, and not political machinations. I do believe the policy of the Orthodox Church exists for good reasons, and not for malice; and it seems a little offensive to me to suggest otherwise.