www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West EC vs. EO view of RC "Marian" Doctrines and Papal Infalibility

Wife & I are have many discussions of late. We came back to (Roman) Catholic Church in last few months after several years in Protestantism.

Wife enjoys reverence but having issues with "coldness" during Mass, Immaculate Conception (sinless person other than Christ), Papal Infalibility, etc...

How do EC and EO compare and differ on those doctrines?

And my wife really hates the way the RC church is "arrogant" yet is embroiled in so much scandal...

dear Dave:

To quote the eminent Vatican expert in all things Eastern Churches (and professsor emeritus of the Pontifical Oriental Institute of Rome), the Mitred Archimandrite Robert (Taft, s.j.):

"we are Orthodox in all things, and the only difference is that we are in Communion with Rome"

Does that help?

Have you visited any of the Eastern Catholic Churches in your area? We have reverence too (rather different in aspect, but no less profound).

Than why do allot of Eastern Catholic Churches still have latinizations. Revised Divine Liturgy comes to mind, no Saturday Evening Vespers or Sunday Orthos, replaced by Saturday Evening Divine Liturgy, which follows the Roman Catholic praxis, as well as other things. I find that the model church of Byzantine Catholics or UGCC should be St Elias in Canada. That parish is truly all things Orthodox but in communion with Rome. Also why do Orthodox parishes seem to have more active youth programs than Eastern Catholic Churches. And don't take this wrong, but when I look at what Eastern Orthodoxy has to offer, in terms of learning the Byzantine praxis, it still boggles my mind why Eastern Catholic parish websites don't link to these great resources. Iv'e been to plenty of EC/EO parishes and I find that Eastern Orthodox parishes present the Byzantine tradition way better. I wish we could intercommune. It also appears that in the not so distant future Orthodox Christians will be even more united than ever in terms of jurisdictions. I just wish that Eastern Catholics could also be part of that. An Ecumenical Council of all the Eastern Orthodox Patriarches will be meeting in Council. Byzantine rite Catholics can be united with Rome, but Byzantine Rite Catholics, should be equally united and working side by side with the Eastern Orthodox.

The Ruthenian rubrics strongly recommend for Saturday evening DL to incorporate vespers; it's an expansion of a usage that, in EO use, is 2 or 3 times a year, on specific feasts. It's done to match more closely to Roman praxis, but it is encouraged to be done with vespers (and doing so only adds 15-20 minutes, if that, as it replaces a good chunk of the liturgy with vespers, specifically, the parts that overlap.).

Likewise, parishes, at least in Van Nuys neé Protection of the Mother of God of Phoenix, are being encouraged to hold matins or third hour before Sunday DL's. We use 3rd hour; we used to use Matins.

bkovacs makes invidious comparisons. One could just as well ask why so many Eastern Orthodox parishes not celebrate Vespers on a regular basis, or Orthros prior to the Divine Liturgy (at least on Sundays). Kyr Kallistos wrote ruefully of describing the beauty of Vespers to a group of Catholic priests here in the States, and then being unable to find a parish in the city where it was actually being celebrated.

One can point to other common Orthodox practices as well, such as the use of stained glass in place of canonical icons, a lack of popular participation in the Liturgy, the employment of organs and other musical instruments--one can go on at some length.

We should follow the advice of Father Robert Taft and not compare the pristine ideal of our own confession against the grubby reality of someone else's.

Aramis evades the key point regarding the Ruthenian attitude towards liturgy, which is characterized both by minimalism (do the least with which you can get away), and what I call "Cracker Jack sacramentalism"--the attitude that no liturgy is worth attending if the Eucharist is not offered. I encountered that early in my life as a Ruthenian, when I suggested that someone come to Vespers with me at another Greek Catholic church. He responded, "Why? They're not offering Communion."

Some years later, I asked the pastor if he would consider offering Vespers on Saturday evenings, at least during the summer, when attendance fell off sharply due to people attending Roman Mass on Saturday evening (Ah, the Seventh Day Adventists Catholic Church) in order to get an early start for the beach (or maybe it should have been named "Our Lady of Perpetual Convenience). I pointed out that the Liturgical Instruction said attendance at Vespers or the Vigil could substitute for the Divine Liturgy in fulfillment of the "Sunday Obligation". This was done specifically to advance the restoration of the Liturgy of the Hours in Eastern Catholic worship.

He told me "Our bishops have not received that particular teaching of the Instruction. They believe that it is not consonant with the Eucharistic spirituality of the Ruthenian people".

Translation: If we did it, they would not come, so why bother? Of course, it is the job of the bishops and the presbyters to educate the people so that they will not only know why they should come, but will want to come. However, the bishops have a very low opinion of the faithful, and the faithful obediently try to live down to those expectations.

Here is what Bishop John Elya, retired eparch of Newton for Melkite Catholics, says about Orthodox in communion with Rome [melkite.org]

I've always admired Sayidna John's forthright catholicity.

Bishop John's comments don't really jive with the comments of Patriarch Gregorios III (Laham) that we are "Orthodox with a plus" (i.e. Orthodox in communion with Rome). Nor do they jive with the official declaration of the Melkite Greek Catholic Synod of Bishops that states: "I believe everything that Orthodoxy teaches. And I am in communion with the Bishop of Rome as first among equals according to the limits recognized by the Greek Fathers in the first Millenium before the separation." Nor do Bishop John's comments jive with the affirmation of Pope Benedict XVI that, in the event of reunion, Rome must not demand more from Orthodoxy than what was agreed upon in the first millenium, nor may Orthodoxy condemn as heretical the developments that have taken place in the West.

Sadly, some Eastern Catholics in high places seem to want to throw out the baby (catholicity) with the bathwater (latinization). Pardon me if I'm less than eager to see them succeed.

Nor do they jibe with the statement of Patriarch Lyubomir of Kyiv-Halich, to whit, "Between the Orthodox and the Greek Catholics, there are no theological differences".


It is more sad that some people see catholicity as congruence with the theological speculations of the Latin Church.

Jive?! Never thought I would see that word used here.

You have made some errors in your statement that need correction.

First, regarding what you stated...

It was not Pope Benedict XVI who made that statement but then Professor Josef Ratzinger who said:


You left out that important phrase "with respect to the doctrine of primacy".

Waht was Professor Ratzinger's personal opinion then changed when he became Cardinal Ratzinger and head of the CDF. Here is his response to the Zoghby Initiative:



Now as Pope Benedict XVI, he caused a stir among the Orthodox Churches when he dropped the title "Patriarch of the West". So, it is inaccurate to say that what Professor Ratzinger thought then is what now Pope Benedict XVI thinks today.

Therefore, the Zoghby Initiatve didn't and still doesn't jive with Rome or the Antiochian Orthodox Church.

For further reading on this, I suggest Are the Ratzinger Proposal and Zogh...ndam Fidem for Eastern Catholic Identity [imageandword.com]

Wow. Sometimes I am just stunned as to how quickly a thread can get off topic around here.

Dave is asking some big questions which require . . . answers.

Dave, try reading the book "101 Questions and Answers on the Eastern Catholic Churches" written by a Melkite deacon - his name escapes me right now. Paulist Press is the publisher. Its a good place to start and covers a lot of the basics.

It's by Fr. Deacon Edward Faulk and the book can be previewed here: http://books.google.com/books?id=Gs...=0CDcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I recently experienced a very similar anti-ecumenical example of this kind of thinking among Roman Catholics concerning Eastern Orthodox/Eastern Catholics vs. the Western Church (i.e. the Latin Particular Church). I recently attended or "attempted" to attend a 7:00 PM Sunday evening liturgy (still scratching my head on how canonical is a 7:00 PM Sunday evening liturgy) at one Roman Catholic Church in Monroeville, PA. This particular Roman Catholic Church was built in that classical post-Vatican II, very bland, auditorium style, ultra-modern style church. I had never attended this particular church in the past. I never would have believed that any Roman Cathlic priest in the Greater Pittsburgh area would ever say such comments because of the numerous Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic and Ukrainian Byzantine Catholic churches that exist in and around Pittsburgh. I'll cut to the chase of this very bad ecumenical "faux pas" that this particular Roman Catholic priest made this past Sunday evening. He began his homily this particular "7:00 PM Sunday evening liturgy" by saying that he was invited to attend and officiate a wedding in the South Hills area of Pittsburgh. This priest went on to state that the bride was a Roman Catholic (born and raised) and that the groom was originially raised "Russian Orthodox", but was inatiatied into the Catholic Church via the "Byzantine Rite" as a compromise between a "mixed marriage" couple (i.e. Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox couple). What came out of the mouth of this particular Roman Catholic priest next made me very ill. He stated something like:

"The groom became a Catholic convert by entering the "Byzantine Rite" Catholic Church, I don't know why he would want to join the "Byzantine Rite", he should have just joined the Latin Rite ..."

There are so many things wrong with the above statement, I don't know where to begin. Now being a cradle member of the Ruthenian-Byzantine Catholic Particular Church, I was very, very offended and disapointed with these very derogatory and inflammatory off the cuff remarks made by this Roman Catholic priest. He clearly doesn't read his copy of Canon Law concerning the intiation of Orthodox Christians into the Catholic Church. If he did, he would've known that Orthodox Christians who join the Catholic Church, are iniatied into what ever "Particular Church" tradition that corresponds to the convert's liturgical tradition. So if the convert is "Russian Orthodox", they are to join any of the various branches (Ruthenian, Melkite, Russian, Ukrainian, Greek, etc.) of the Constantinopolitan Particular Church in union w/Rome churches and not the Latin Particular Church.

I personally could not stay to be further insulted by this Roman Catholic priest. I stood up and promptly bowed (from the waist) and crossed myself (x3, from right to the left) and exited the building.

Now this is a Roman Catholic church in Monroeville, PA in Allegheny County. This is the Greater Pittsburgh area where there are at least over 15-20 Ruthenian and Ukrainian Byzantine Catholic parishes, and not the deep South, the Atlantic states or the Mid-West. This is Pittsburgh, where the print media and TV news stations just covered the death and funeral of our late Metropolitan Basil. How can any Roman Catholic priest in the Greater Pittsburgh area in the year 2010 be so uneducated and so ignornant of such Canon Law issues?

This is but another example of the obvious need for education of clerics and laity of the Latin Particular Church concerning their fellow Eastern and Oriental Orthodox and Eastern/Oriental Catholic brothers and sisters.

U-C

U-C,

Write Bishop Zubick, I am sure a corrective letter will be sent at once.

Fr. Deacon Lance