|
0 members (),
1,781
guests, and
94
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,508
Posts417,509
Members6,159
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 695
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 695 |
Did someone say Metropolitan Stefan Soroka (UGCC in the US) accepted a pallium?
I would be surprised.
I am pretty certain the last couple UGCC Metropolitans of Canada did not accept a pallium.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Did someone say Metropolitan Stefan Soroka (UGCC in the US) accepted a pallium? I asked, earlier, whether he did; but I don't think anyone has yet answered one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,131
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,131 |
Did someone say Metropolitan Stefan Soroka (UGCC in the US) accepted a pallium? I asked, earlier, whether he did; but I don't think anyone has yet answered one way or the other. Easy enough to call or write the chancery to find out what is so. 827 North Franklin Street Philadelphia, PA 19123 (215) 627-0143
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 12
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 12 |
I was very attracted to orthodoxy when I was eighteen and saw it as (I know false) between Rome and Anglicanims. I went to see a Russian priest who was very friendly,welcoming and kind, but he told me I could never become truly Orthodox unless I was from a Russian or "Orthodox Nation". I then found that Roman Catholicism can and does adapt to many and a huge varieties of styles, cultures,arts,buildings,nations, classes. I have lived in Ireland where I found Catholicism with an irish brogue and national style and now I live in England and am trying to discover and unearth (there is in the old College I teach in) the English Catholic spirit. Catholicism seems to inculturate (in the best sense of the word) sadly, I don't think Orthodoxy does. I do not really find in general, the art of Icons helpful and attractive. That's maybe my fault.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,285
AthanasiusTheLesser Member
|
|
AthanasiusTheLesser Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,285 |
I was very attracted to orthodoxy when I was eighteen and saw it as (I know false) between Rome and Anglicanims. I went to see a Russian priest who was very friendly,welcoming and kind, but he told me I could never become truly Orthodox unless I was from a Russian or "Orthodox Nation". I then found that Roman Catholicism can and does adapt to many and a huge varieties of styles, cultures,arts,buildings,nations, classes. I have lived in Ireland where I found Catholicism with an irish brogue and national style and now I live in England and am trying to discover and unearth (there is in the old College I teach in) the English Catholic spirit. Catholicism seems to inculturate (in the best sense of the word) sadly, I don't think Orthodoxy does. I do not really find in general, the art of Icons helpful and attractive. That's maybe my fault. First of all, what the priest said to you was incorrect. One need not be from a Russian or "Orthodox nation" to become truly Orthodox. Second, one will never understand or appreciate the important role of icons in Orthodox spirituality if they are viewed as religious art. Blessed icons are sacramental, and make real for the believer the presence of who or what they depict.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 12
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 12 |
Indeed, I know that I cons are a "sacramental", but they are also written in a particular style, proper to the nations in which Holy Orthodoxy is found. I find that Roman Catholicism can take its cultural form and expression in many varied styles (especially art) of both period and nation and somehow fit. My feeling - and it's only a feeling - (although many Orthodox have said it to me) that Orthodoxy seems to be most clearly expressed in Eastern forms and "dress". Western rite orthodoxy might be the answer - and I know little about it. The priest who said this to me was a venerable and ancient priest of Russia. He was expressing his opinion only, but it did make me think......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,226
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,226 |
Unless someone can convince me otherwise - I am considering converting from Eastern Catholic to Orthodoxy - I do not see the advantages to practicing an Eastern religion under the heavy hand of Latinization. I am currently waiting for 1 year to make sure I'm not just jumping ship. I also wonder if I am jumping ship - am I jumping ship because it is going to sink? Slava Isusu Christu! It is a decision you must make with great discernment. I was Latin Catholic for 38 years and Ruthenian Catholic for eight years before the move to Holy Orthodoxy. It tooks years of prayer and discernment, but it was the right decision for my family. We are in great peace now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
election of bishops will come from a list of names pre-approved in Rome (presumably at the Eastern Congregation). At least in our case the "pre-approval" and the approval comes from the Synod. Rome concurs or can theoretically disapprove and appoint another candidate, but as I mentioned the last time that happened was in Toronto in '92. After that snafu which happened just as our Church was emerging from the catacombs without a strong Patriarch, I don't think anyone in Rome or Kyiv ever foresees that happening again. What is on paper may be one thing, but what is reality is sometimes different. Diak, I came across this article [ jimmyakin.com] this morning by Jimmy Akin on the selection of Eastern Catholic bishops. While he's no authority on the Eastern Church he does note some recent appointments of bishops in the Maronite Church from the Vatican Information Service [ visnews-en.blogspot.com] blog: The Synod of Bishops of the Maronite Church has elected the following archbishops and bishops, all of whom have received prior assent from the Holy Father:
- Fr. Moussa El-Hage O.A.M., superior of the convent of Sts. Sarkis and Bacchus in Edhen and Zghorta, as archbishop of Haifa and the Holy Land of the Maronites (Catholics 7,000, priests 11, religious 9), Israel, and as patriarchal exarch of Jerusalem and Palestine (Catholics 504, permanent deacons 1) and Jordan (Catholics 1,500, priests 2). The bishop-elect was born in Antoura, Lebanon in 1954 and ordained a priest in 1980. He studied in Jerusalem and in Rome and has held various offices in his religious order as well as being active in pastoral work and education. He succeeds Archbishop Paul Nabil El-Sayah, who had earlier resigned from the pastoral care of those circumscriptions to take up the office of bishop of the Patriarchal Curia.
- Fr. Paul Rouhana O.L.M., secretary of the Middle East Council of Churches, as bishop of the patriarchal vicariate of Sarba, Lebanon. The bishop-elect was born in Amchit, Lebanon in 1954 and ordained a priest in 1982. He studied in Belgium and in France and been active in education at "Saint Esprit" University in Kaslik. He succeeds Bishop Guy-Paul Noujaim, who resigned from the pastoral care of the same archdiocese in accordance with canon 210 para. 1-2 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.
- Fr. Maroun Ammar, rector of the major seminary of Ghazir, as bishop of the patriarchal vicariate of Joubbe, Lebanon. The bishop-elect was born in Haje, Lebanon in 1956 and ordained a priest in 1983. He has served as pastor in various parishes and is a judge at the Court of Appeal of the Maronite Tribunal of Lebanon. He succeeds Bishop Francis Baissari, who resigned from the pastoral care of the same archdiocese in accordance with canon 210 para. 1-2 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.
- Fr. Joseph Mouawad, vicar general of the eparchy of Jbeil-Byblos, Lebanon, as bishop of the Patriarchal Curia. The bishop-elect was born in Mayfouq, Lebanon in 1970 and ordained a priest in 1995. He studied in Rome and has been active in pastoral work, as well as teaching theology at "La Sagesse" University in Beirut and "Saint Esprit" University in Kaslik.
- Fr. Georges Chihane, patriarchal administrator of Haifa and the Holy Land of the Maronites, Israel, and patriarchal exarch of Jerusalem, Palestine and Jordan, as eparchal vicar of Cairo, Egypt and Sudan of the Maronites (Catholics 5,500, priests 6, religious 3). The bishop-elect was born in Haret Sakhr, Lebanon in 1953 and ordained a priest in 1979. He has served as pastor in various parishes in Lebanon, France and Jordan. Doesn't this confirm what we discussed earlier about how the selection of Bishops occurs under the CCEO? Perhaps I misunderstood you but I thought you were trying to say it was different for the UGCC. If so, why would it be different for the UGCC when the Maronite Church (also a Patriarchal Church) has the men who may be selected as bishops pre-approved by the Pope?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,131
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,131 |
From my current viewpoint - there is no reason to remain Eastern Catholic.
Unless someone can convince me otherwise - I am considering converting from Eastern Catholic to Orthodoxy - I do not see the advantages to practicing an Eastern religion under the heavy hand of Latinization. I can agree well enough with this. If this is your paradigm, you will always be uncomfortable. If your focus is always drawn to this narrative/view, you will never be happy with it. Is there another way to look at the value of being Greek Catholic or Orthodox that does not rely on on rejection of a subjective paradigm ("I choose 'X' is good because it is NOT 'Y'") but rather going to something because it is what it is? ("I choose 'Y' because I choose 'Y'")
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 192
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 192 |
How can either side of the cultural divide be the 'true church' when one bishop (albeit the acknowleged seat of the 'first among equals') has gone it alone, and the remaining bishops have gone it alone without him?!?
One might say that the latter have adhered to traditions more closely and genuinely (the Orthodox) and truly they have. I am afraid this is not the real picture of history, that one bishop, that of Rome, had gone its own way without the rest of the bishops (where the other four patriarchs are ment). Neither was the bishop of Rome claiming to have the right to change traditions on account of st. Peters chair. The more exact historical picture is that after the fifth century, after Chalcedon, we have a polarized christianity, which, with the Islamic conquest of the seventh century, became more sharp, that of western latin versus eastern greek. The conflict is between two parts and not between one bishop of Rome versus four patriarchs. The Roman side did not change tradition. It had developed its own tradition from the beginning and remained faithful to it developing it in face of eastern political and religious developments on the other side. Remember that starting from Constantinople I (381) down to Iconoclastic measures against Rome in the 8th century, east was developing its own identity in political alongside religious matters.
Last edited by Arbanon; 07/28/12 08:09 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 192
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 192 |
I do not see the advantages to practicing an Eastern religion under the heavy hand of Latinization. Within the slavic orthodoxy you might want to be converted to there is already a "heavy" hand of latinized orthodoxy. Russian orthodoxy is an example. However, I think there is a crucial point to understand in fron of such questions you face. You are either eastern catholic because you understand and see it as spiritually vital and essential the communion with the pope as the head of the church or otherwise there is really no point to be an eastern catholic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9 |
You have received many answers for your question. I am going to give you the reason I remain Catholic, despite the problems we see today. I apologize if I am only repeating what has already been said.
My belief is that to be steeped in History is to cease being anything but Catholic. It is important to me that when looking back we see that the Seat of Peter seems to have universal jurisdiction
[quote][quote]I believe that the Papacy makes logical sense and is a unique identifier that the Orthodox lack but was there from the beginning, I stay Catholic. I personally think it's great to have someone to put their foot down - I've noticed varying opinions on some more important things among the Orthodox that just *cannot* be solved with their current ecclesiology.[/quote][/quote]
I totally agree.
And as for problems with the Liturgy on the Eastern Catholic side, if Archimandrite Robert Taft can see past the difficulties so can I. Because If nothing of Doctrine is false, that means something of Doctrine is false in the Orthodox.
GOD Bless.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 978 |
My belief is that to be steeped in History is to cease being anything but Catholic. It is important to me that when looking back we see that the Seat of Peter seems to have universal jurisdiction Yet, one can read history and cease to be anything but Orthodox. The Universal Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome is not found in the Eastern Fathers of the Church. There is a big difference between what the fathers of the East see as Rome’s appellate role and the Latin idea of the Bishop of Rome as having Universal Jurisdiction over and above the Eastern Patriarchates. The west and the east, historically, have had two different ways of looking at the Roman primacy. I think, for the time being, I remain a Byzantine Catholic because I see the need for a strong primacy (maybe not as strong as Rome has defined it).
Last edited by Nelson Chase; 08/08/12 03:04 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 426
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 426 |
Honestly, if not for the Byzantine Catholic church I've been going to, I would have jumped to Orthodoxy. I wasn't aware of the apparent dichotomy between East,and West Christianity, until I encountered it, recently. I asked a friend if he had attended an Orthodox service, he then responded by asking me if I heard of Eastern Catholics. It was then, I started doing some research, and found a home in the Byzantine Catholic church I've been attending since the feast of St. John the Baptist.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
While he's no authority on the Eastern Church I would definitely agree with that statement. Paragraph 3 of Canon 182 states "the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church is to examine the names of the candidates and compile a list of the candidates by secret ballot, which is to be transmitted through the patriarch to the Apostolic See to obtain the assent of the Roman Pontiff." As to the Synod sending one name that it has chosen for the episcopacy, Paragraph 4 refers to a single candidate, not multiple or "list" of candidates when it refers to "The assent of the Roman Pontiff once given for an individual candidate..." Canon 185 has the contingency if the candidate elected by the Synod is not on the so-called "pre-approved list". The meaning of the word "assent" is certainly not the same as "to choose". Now, of course, this only holds for patriarchal Churches. Those churches of metropolitan or eparchial sui iuris status are directly dependent on Rome to actually choose the candidate since there is no Patriarch. VIS and other Vatican news sources are not especially known for their familiarity with Eastern Catholic ecclesiological affairs.
|
|
|
|
|
