www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Have We Received the Schism?

I won't name names, and I won't give addresses, but I will say that I have personally witnessed Antiochian Orthodox receiving the Sacraments in both Latin and Melkite Churches. I know they are Antiochian Orthodox because they make it very, very clear to those who talk to them that they are. In the case of the Melkite community these Antiochians are regular congregants, and in the case of the Latin parish it was a visitor for Eastern who was with her Ukrainian Catholic fiance, and she was very happy to hear that I worship in the Melkite community (many of whom are family friends of hers). I've also heard (not seen personally) of Melkites doing the same in Antiochian Orthodox churches, with full knowledge in the community that they were Melkites, so the sword cuts both ways.

I'm not making any claims about this indicating a "hidden intercommunion", but I will say that in none of these cases did anyone think there was anything particularly wrong or unusual about their participation (nor did they indicate that it was something that everyone does). I also know that I'm not the only one with firsthand experience with this sort of thing between Melkites and Antiochian Orthodox.

So if anyone insists on first-hand accounts, there you have it. I'm sorry if this scandalizes anyone, but since folks seemed more upset about the second-hand nature of these reports, I figured I could at least offer my own substantiation of such occurances.

Peace and God bless!

What people do is up to them and it isn't our place to sit in judgment. The real scandal would not be what we on the Internet think about all this, but whether those mentioned above are acting without the knowledge or consent of their confessors; and conversely if their confessors and/or bishop are knowingly letting this happen. I won't speculate as to which is the case.

I can say from my own experience attending an Antiochian parish for a couple years that intercommunion was not allowed; and there were long standing attendees of the parish through marriage who had not converted and they did not receive.

I know people who disavow themselves of their teachings of their own church, yet still receive communion in their own church. So it's not simply a matter of crossing confessional lines. It's really the same issue.

Perhaps somewhere there is just a level of paradox that we have to live with in order to see past, or refuse to live with the schism. I've been thinking about this thread in light of this story

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=58680

At first I thought it was not a good idea for him to break the normal discipline, but in retrospect I changed my mind. It may take individual actions like this to take us out of the complacency of accepting the schism. Maybe it won't be something that happens all at once in formal dialog.

This particular 'incident ' has been discussed earlier

Here

Admittedly towards the end of the thread it did get kinda messy .

I'm still not convinced about the rights and wrongs of this . I wasn't there , and I don't know what was going on in the mind of the Orthodox Bishop at the time

Metropolit Corneanu asked the Holy Eucharist and he received from the hand of Mons. Francisco Javier Lozano, the Papal representant in Romania.

Metropolit Corneanu did this in a demonstrative manner and he broke the obedience and the canons. He is not only a bishop, but also a monk. Obedience was totally broke.

But very serious is the deed of the Papal representant. He surely knew the Orthodox canons. He knew that doing this the Orthodox Bishop will broke the canons.

I am afraid that Vatican and the Catholic Church want to expand unscrupulous. If the Father Pope John Paul II succeeded to build a peaceful bridge, now the politics of Vatican made any dialog fragile.

Vatican uses politics to reach targets. What ecumenism? A big and untasteful soup?

Also the Papal representant was not polite, he had to respect the faith of this land.

I did read that in July the Synod will talk the case of Metropolit Corneanu. I pray will be taken a wise measure. However, he must repent for his disobedience.

Unity cannot be reached so. Unity must be for all. Community and communion. Otherwise is politics and futile talk.

m+

(Matthew 18, 6-7, NIV)



I did read today that the Orthodox Church of Russia, through Metropilit Kiril, demanded a clarification in the case of metropolit Corneanu. The Romanian Patriarchy stressed that the case will be discussed in the next meeting of the Holy Synod on 8 th and 9th of July.

I wait to see an answer from Vatican about this case.

The Romanian Patriarchy said that 'the actual dialog with the Romano-Catholic Church, quite fragile yet, cannot be helped, but rather complicated by deeds considered by someones "prophetic", and by the others "problematic".

God have much mercy upon all!

m+

The man should either be defrocked or excommunicated. He knows the rules and the schism does not justify breaking them. His actions gave scandal to members of his church based on what I read. He could of course "swim the Tiber." as the Anglicans say. I realize he violated Orthodox rules and not those of the Church of Rome and its affiliates, but he is Orthodox and should have set a good example for his flock.

Have I received the schism? No; did you send it?

Fr. Serge

My soul, as an ordinary Orthodox that I am, meditates upon this matter. I find the deed of this Bishop very grave, he will have his pay.

But more serious is what did the Papal representant. He knew. Surely he knew the Orthodox canons.

I must meditate and ask spiritual guidance regarding my personal position about the RCC. Cannot be anymore one of confidence and trust.

m+

The papal representative cannot be expected to enforce the rules of another Church, any more than Catholics can expect some other Church to enforce Catholic rules.

Fr. Serge

According to our Canons, any Orthodox may approach the Eucharist in a Catholic Liturgy if they are properly disposed. It's not our job to turn away those who hold to the Apostolic Faith, especially Bishops who are presumably acting on their own Apostolic authority.

Catholics did not approach this Bishop and demand that he receive the Body and Blood of Christ, and it would be wrong to simply deny a true Bishop the Holy Mysteries when he humbly approaches them. How is the sharing of Christ a "grave offense" on the part of the Catholics in this case?

In our belief, your Bishops are true successors of the Apostles. It would be an offense for us to deny them the Eucharist when they humbly approach. We shouldn't be held in disdain for sharing the Sacraments with those who uphold the Faith and live according to the Life of Christ; if you have a problem with the Bishop's actions, take it up with him, not with those of us who respect him as a shepard of God.

Peace and God bless!

I know that the Catholic canons allow that an Orthodox approach and partake.

The Papal representant knew the Orthodox canons. He knew that, doing this, the Orthodox Bishop would break canons and obedience. Then, the Orthodox Bishop cannot partake if he is properly disposed (?!), but only and only AFTER confession.

Then, the Orthodox Bishop represents many souls, he is a shepherd.

What if he decide to become Catholic?! About 300 years ago 80% of the Orthodox priests from Transylvania became Catholic. Greek-Catholic.

This is not correct from the RCC, it is politics. Too much.

How can we unite, if there is no respect?

The RCC has her own canons. The Orthodox Church has also her own canons.

And all must obey.

Whether we will together partake, then all must be with blessing. The two sets of canons must not come in contradiction to each other.

What if a certain RC Bishop would choose to ordinate as priest a woman? So he has seen at the Lutheran neighbor. Does not matter. I mean he surely would broke a RC canon. What happen to him?

But he must be obedient with body and soul and mind to the RCC and serve Christ, observing the RCC canons.

I find that Vatican does much politics and is arrogant. Christ is beaten in nails without mercy, during this time the world continues to fall and it is worse than in the pagan times.

m+

Do the Orthodox turn away potential Catholic converts on the grounds that by joining an Orthodox Church they would be violating Catholic canons? Of course not, it is not the job of the Eastern Orthodox to enforce Catholic canons.

You're trying to turn this into an insult by the Catholic Church against the Orthodox, when in fact this is simply a show of respect: we view the Orthodox as our "Sacramental partners", with this Bishop being a true Bishop. It's not like we asked him to become Catholic and get Baptised again in order to receive the Body and Blood.

The real issue is between the Bishop and his Church, not between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox. Trying to put this as a crime on the part of the Latin nuncio seems like an exercise in avoiding the real issue, and in blaming Catholics for Orthodox problems. This seems like an unhealthy fixation to me.

That being said, I do understand how painful this action must be, and I'm not trying to belittle that pain. I'm just saying that blame should be properly placed with the Orthodox who are not upholding their own canons, not with the Catholics who are upholding our own.

Peace and God bless!

My words gave you this impression? Lord sees my soul, I did not even think of the word insult.



This is clear, no doubt. I did not say a contrary matter.



For God's sake, where did I try to put as a crime?!! Crime is a serious word!


Could you kindly explain me what do you mean? What unhealthy fixation? Shall I understand you value this way my person or what?

I want only to testify that the Orthodox Church is the True Church of Christ. This is my faith and belief. And not only mine. If in a dialog there are words like 'unhealthy fixation' or how I did read in other thread 'stubborn resistance of the Orthodox against Pope' etc, then we talk in vain.

I ask forgiveness for all my posts in this forum and to all the persons. I withdraw any participation.

In Hristos, Marian+

Marian raised worthy questions of conscience - we are all bound by canons of our respective faith communities. The Holy See is no neophyte in regards diplomacy and negotiations among churches, so one wonders if there was any broader intent beyond communion in the action of giving and receiving the Holy Eucharist. We note that in the USA the Catholic bishops have tended not to discriminate or deny Holy Communion to those approaching the altar (note the issue of giving communion to Catholic politicians with long-standing commitment to abortion). In no way would this Orthodox bishop be comparable. But one thinks the representative of Rome would not want to refuse communion to a bishop approaching the Sacred Table. That would be another reason for recriminations.

Still one wonders whether this was a staged event or a move by the bishop to affiliate with the Roman church.

Those acting in the Spirit often push the boundaries of law. The disciples ate grain on the Sabbath. They and Jesus were Jews and bound by the God-give Mosaic Law. Still Jesus defended his disciples' actions. St Paul also spoke of the freedom given by the Holy Spirit to those of this New Law.

Peace be with you Marian, and to others contemplating this event. We say this in context of Jesus' priestly prayer - "That they all may be one!"
-----------------------------------
"Acquire a peaceful spirit, and thousands around you will be saved." �St. Serafim of Sarov