www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Latin Rite Catholic considering switching to a Byzantine church

Are there any Byzantine Catholics on here who where Roman Rite if so why did you switch to the Byzantine Right

I formally "changed rite" (now called a "transfer of canonical jurisdiction") some 46 years ago when marrying my wife, a Ukrainian Greek Catholic with whom I will celebrate 47 years of marriage next month.

My motives at the time were a mix of a genuine attraction to Byzantine liturgy and spirituality (with which I had become quite familiar before meeting my wife), a conviction that we both needed a shared spiritual foundation for our marriage, and a strong conviction that we shouldn't contribute to more attrition from the UGC Church.

Over the years, in a life that has taken us from the Midwest to Europe and has included a year in both Russian and Ukraine, my wife and I have been fortunate to find welcoming spiritual homes in both UGCC and BCC parishes (and, on occasion when necessary, in RC parishes where our "Byzantine-ness" was always respected, if not fully understood). We have also been welcomed by our Orthodox brothers and sisters.

The lesson I have learned from my "change" or "transfer" has been that the spiritual and liturgical riches of the Byzantine tradition are like the "treasure hidden in the field" that we hear about in the Gospel. You have to "buy the whole field" in order to reap the benefit. You can't be a "little bit" Byzantine. You have to be prepared to accept the cultural context of Byzantine worship and the history that has brought these communities to our shores. You have to be prepared to make the effort to understand, and to deepen your understanding.

I attempted to switch and then found out that my ancestral roots were Byzantine because of my French Lebanese background.

In the process of rediscovering the East through the Melkite Church, I went East and joined the Orthodox Church. It was not easy as the Priest called me to deep repentance -- a move that was very beneficial to my life and my marriage.

Elizabeth Maria:

Why did the priest call you to "deep repentance"? Can you explain?

Just before the Orthodox priest read the service of a catechumen, he showed me the ceremony of Holy Chrismation and he pointed out that I would need to make a full life confession -- all the sins I could remember from my earliest memories.

He explained that not only catechumens make full-life confessions, but also monastics upon their entrance to monasticism before their tonsure, and deacons just before their ordination to the Holy Priesthood.

And yes, the catechumenate was a call to deep repentance as I recalled sins of my infancy, when I was not quite two years old. Thank God I was allowed to live to adulthood and truly repent.

Of course, changing rites from Roman Catholicism to Eastern Catholicism does not usually involve a full-life confession, but when we thought of changing rites our Melkite priest did recommend it. So, in the end, we made two full-life confessions to Christ our God, once in the presence of a Melkite Priest and again three years later, another one in the presence of an Orthodox Priest. Both profoundly affected my life and were a source of grace.

Slava Isusu Christu!

I wanted to experience the church as the earliest Christians did. The Divine liturgy we celebrate in the Byzantine Rite is near the same as the Liturgy of the Church Fathers. Also the liturgical chant moved me as compared to the Roman Catholic mass. I never did like organs!

I posted a similar thread on this forum earlier this month, take a look: Top 10 Reasons to Become Byzantine Catholic .

Mike Lillie
http://www.byzantinetucson.com

I was a Latin Rite Catholic who went through the canonical change in Rites. I paid a visit to the local Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church. I was so impressed and moved by the Divine Liturgy, the music, the community, and Eastern theology that I decided to stay. My wife had to agree to transfer, as well. However, she wasn't too keen on the idea. In the end, she saw that it was important to me and our daugher. Our three year old daughter fell in love with the parish and vice versa. So, she did acquiesce.

I'm sad to say that some Latin bishops to this day don't permit change of ritual church. I'm sure you could try going over their head, but I have yet to see this attempted.

I am puzzled about Elizabeth Maria's statement:

"And yes, the catechumenate was a call to deep repentance as I recalled sins of my infancy, when I was not quite two years old. Thank God I was allowed to live to adulthood and truly repent."

Does the Orthodox Church teach that a not-quite-two-year-old is capable of committing sin, particularly one so serious that one would feel a need to be called to repentance for it upon reaching adulthood? I have no doubt that a two-year-old is capable of behavior that would be annoying or displeasing to adults, and that such a child might be aware, in some way, of having displeased a parent, or a relative. But is that "sin" in the sense of an offense against God?

I know we speak about having sinned "knowingly or unknowingly" ("volnomu o nevolnomu") but I guess I had always taken that to refer to sins committed after reaching the age of reason and with a kind of careless disregard about what one was doing, not acts committed before one even had a tenuous grasp of what it meant to violate a Divine command.

I may be wrong, but I am not aware that Catholic moral theologians, Eastern or Western, would take such a rigorous position. Is the view shared widely in Orthodoxy? Can it be reconciled with what we know from secular disciplines such as child and developmental psychology?

My transfer actually did come through. Unfortunately, it sat on someone's desk at the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis Chancery office for quite a while before the Archbishop saw it. From what I understand, it took a couple of phone calls from the Eparchy Chancery to move it along. The whole process took about a year to complete. It was well worth the wait.

When I was in the Roman Catholic Church, we did not have to confess sins that were involuntary, unknown, not serious, or considered "venial." Indeed, what one person might judge to be only a "venial" sin, another person or a priest might consider it to a "mortal" sin because of rationalizations.

However, in the Orthodox Church, we are to confess all faults and sins whether voluntary or involuntary, known or unknown, because all sins are considered serious. And yes, this thinking confused many Catholics who converted about the same time as I did into Orthodoxy.

In the case of my childhood, the Holy Spirit enlightened me in vivid detail about sins of which I was unaware. Whether they were venial or mortal did not really matter, and I think that is why scrupulosity seems to be rare in Orthodoxy. As these sins were brought to light, I confessed them to the priest without mentioning unnecessary details, but without excusing myself either.

I respect the principle that each person's encounter with the Infinite must start with where that person is spiritually and in human terms. So it is with the greatest of respect that I press my original question:

"Does the Orthodox Church teach that a not-quite-two-year-old is capable of committing sin, particularly one so serious that one would feel a need to be called to repentance for it upon reaching adulthood?"

It seems that identifying the actions of such a child as "sin" could reflect a kind of scrupulosity. Does the Orthodox theology of sin consider a person "guilty" without any awareness of what one is doing? Does Orthodox theology see sin in the action or in the will of the actor? If an Orthodox not-quite-two-year-old can sin, what about an Orthodox of limited mental capacity?

I have been taught by solid Latin priests and they all said to confess all sins. A grave sin is different than a smaller sin but sin is sin and should be confessed.I have seen this in many Catholic sources.

Doesn't the EOC only recognize the distinction of voluntary and involuntary sins? It was my understanding that mortal and venial were strictly Latin categories.


That's gotta be a good thing!


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Praise the Lord. That is very solid orthodox teaching!


In my many years as an Orthodox Christian, I have yet to meet someone who is truly scrupulous because we are to hold nothing back from the Priest in Holy Confession. If we forget to confess a sin, we are encouraged to confess it the next time.

However, I knew many "scrupulous" Roman Catholics, especially in Los Angeles, in Oakland, and in San Francisco, who were told not to confess venial or indeliberate sins. When these "scrupulous" Catholics became Eastern Catholic or Orthodox, they found that their "scrupulosity" resolved instantly with their first full-life confession. I think that is why many or all Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Priests also encourage a full-life confession upon transfer or conversion, unless a person is truly mentally ill and incapable of doing so.

For a great source of information about this, Metropolitan Hierotheos has written many books. Orthodox Psychotherapy
and The Illness and Cure of the Soul in the Orthodox Tradition are two of his great reads. Father Thomas Hopko's little guide to confession comes highly recommended, and in it he has some recommendations for those souls who are scrupulous, mainly not to dwell on sins once they are confessed, and to have no more care for them. In fact, this is part of the absolution prayer in Orthodoxy.