www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Uniate to Orthodox to Uniate

I am curious about a situation. A friend of mine was Byzantine Catholic, became Orthodox (OCA) and now feels called to return to the Byzantine Catholic Church. He was baptized/chrismated Byzantine Catholic, then he was chrismated when he was received in Orthodoxy, and now he wants to return to Byzantine Catholicism. Is there something specific he need do?

note-I used the word "Uniate" in the title because other word wouldn't fit


Thanks

Generally, he would be asked simply to go to confession. The priest would discuss the issue with him and try to get to the underlying reasons for the path your friend took, address them, and then keep him pointed to the Lord.

Provided no formal act of defection was tendered, he's still canonically Catholic.

Confession is needed. That should be the extent of it, unless there are other deep seated issues.

Note that orthodox ecclesiastical divorces would need to be sent through the marriage tribunal &/or the bishop for ratification and decree of nullity. Subsequent marriages are automatically suspect until such a decree of nullity.

I'm a little confused by this statement. I was baptized/confirmed Byzantine Catholic. I was then confirmed and received into Orthodoxy. How can I still be canonically Catholic?

Etnick: From a Catholic perspective, if a Catholic becomes Orthodox they have gone into schism, but not departed from the Catholic church. They didn't per se renounce Catholicism, they embraced schism which are two different things.

For a classic example, consider the situation in Catherine of Siena's time when there were two popes. Alleigance to one Pope would bring you into schism in the eyes of followers of the other pope. But those followers never regarded you as not being Catholic or having what is necessary for salvation.

In the eyes of the Catholic church, the Orthodox church has what is necessary for the fulness of salvation and the fulness of a relationship with God, just as schismatics within the Catholic church do. Therefore orthodox are just as "catholic" in one sense as Catholics and no restitution of someone in the OPs friend's situation beyond confession is necessary from a Catholic persepctive.

Otsheylnik,

Do you mind backing up your assertions with some citations? It's news to me that not being in union with the Pope does nothing to endanger one's salvation.

Alexis

I recall the catechism of the Catholic Church talking somewhere about there being little to prohibit common celebration of the Eucharist with Eastern Orthodox (a document approved of by one Ratzinger).

I take that as somewhat an affirmation that the Catholic Church views them as having a full faith. That is affirmed by the fact that Dominus Iesus, again the work of Cardinal Ratzinger, refers to the Orthodox Churches as "true" churches, again suggesting they have some handle on what is essential about the faith.

Further, from Unitatis reintegratio, 3:

It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation.

Hope this helps.

Otsheylnik,

Forgive me, but it kind of seems you're all over the place.

Little to prohibit celebration of the Eucharist with the Eastern Orthodox does not mean that one doesn't need to be united to the Bishop of Rome.

It's funny you should mention Dominus Iesus. The clarification of that document uses the same words as the quote you use from Unitatis Redintigration regarding no deprivation of the significance and mystery of salvation, and is immediately preceded by: "It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects...". The main defect of the Eastern Orthodox, of course, of not being in union with the Bishop of Rome.

Also, having a "handle" on what is essential to the Faith is not the same as saying that they have the True Faith and suffer from no "defects" because of a lack thereof.

Alexis

Alexis,


Are you seriously suggesting that you have taken up the cause of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus - because that is what it's starting to sound like.

Many years,

Neil

The following is an excerpt from an essay by Cardinal Kasper that I found helpful:

". . . the [Second Vatican] Council is aware of the sinfulness of the members of its own Church, and of sinful structures existing in the Church itself; and it knows about the need of reforming the shape of the Church. The Constitution on the Church and the Decree on Ecumenism state expressly that the Church is a pilgrim Church, an ecclesia “semper purificanda”, which must constantly take the way of penance and renewal. Thus, the ecumenical dialogue fulfills the task of an examination of conscience. Ecumenism is not possible without conversion and renewal.

The Catholic Church too is wounded by the divisions of Christianity. Her wounds include the impossibility of concretely realizing fully her own Catholicity in the situation of division. Several aspects of being Church are better realized in the other Churches. Therefore, ecumenism is no one-way street, but a reciprocal learning process, or – as stated in the ecumenical Encyclical “Ut unum sint” – an exchange of gifts.

All this shows that the divisions did not reach down to the roots, nor do they reach up to heaven. The Council distinguishes full communion from imperfect communion. The aim of ecumenical work is the full communion and the fullness of unity, which cannot be a unitary Church, but a unity in diversity. The way to it is therefore not the return of the others into the fold of the Catholic Church, nor the conversion of individuals to the Catholic Church (even if this must obviously be mutually acknowledged when it is based on reasons of conscience).

In the ecumenical movement the question is the conversion of all to Jesus Christ. As we move nearer to Jesus Christ, in him we move nearer to one another. Therefore, it is not a question of Church political debates and compromises, not of some kind of union, but of a reciprocal spiritual exchange and a mutual enrichment. The oikoumene is a spiritual process, in which the question is not about a way backwards but about a way forwards. Such unity is ultimately a gift of God’s Spirit and of his guidance. Therefore, the oikoumene is neither a mere academic nor only a diplomatic matter; its soul is spiritual ecumenism." [Cardinal Kasper, Current Problems in Ecumenical Theology, section 2]

Neil, I haven't recently "taken up" a dogma of the Church. I would imagine you would subscribe to it, too, being a Catholic.

And Todd, thank you, but I rarely find anything from Cardinal Kasper helpful. In fact I, like many other Catholics who care enough to even know who he is, find his remarks deeply, deeply disturbing - and that's as charitably as I can put it.

Alexis

I sense some unhappiness with Pope Benedict's choice of Cardinal Kasper as head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

Extra ecclesia nulla sallus just doesn't mean what you think it means. It hasn't actually been interpreted in that manner for more than a century.

Cardinal Kasper made another helpful comment during an interview with Our Sunday Visitor:



OSV: The Russian Orthodox does not accept that the Roman Catholic Church, the Latin rite Church can evangelize in Russia.

Cardinal Kasper: This problem is linked with the Russian Orthodox understanding of their canonical territory. The Catholic Church recognizes that Russia has a longstanding Christian tradition and culture. We recognize all the sacraments, the episcopate and the priesthood of the Russian Orthodox Church. Thus, while Catholic Christians living in Russia may clearly give witness of their Catholic faith, there cannot be an evangelization as such, as this can only be undertaken in a pagan context. Therefore, it is not our policy or strategy to convert the Orthodox to the Catholic Church. There may be some priests who do something imprudent -- you can never exclude such a thing -- but this is not the Catholic Church's policy. We do not undertake missionary work in Russia as we do in the pagan regions of the world. We want to collaborate with the Russian Orthodox in missionary work and in evangelization, which is needed in modern Russia after more then 70 years of atheistic propaganda and education.

If one member of the Orthodox faithful, by reason of his or her conscience, wants to become Catholic, we cannot shut the door to that person. There are also Catholics who become Orthodox. This is a question of religious freedom, and we have to recognize and to respect it from both sides.

Alexis,

You imagine wrongly if you think that I subscribe to that statement in the tone, tenor, and interpretation that I sense you are putting to it.


Ah, a rare day, Stuart and I shall agree - at least in part.

I'd be inclined to shorten the length of time that he suggests has passed since the phrase was last interpreted in its literal form to more like 70-75 years.

Many years,

Neil