www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Why are you Catholic and not Orthodox?

????? more sincere? What about the Inquisition?

I would say Byzantine is more mystical and accepting of The Holy Mysteries without having to analyze or prove them.

Remind me not to read your posts while drinking coffee.

Exactely, when I say historically contradicting, I have in mind this that while in theory and in minority mystical, in practice and majority produces ethnically, i.e extreme externity, identified orthodoxy.

What about inquisition? Throuughout medieval period inquistion was part of the church. Who expelled and interned Arius, Athanasius, chrysostomus?

What does kanun of king Dusan punish latin believers and heretics with?

Thank goodness I finished my cup.

Perhpas, when drinking coffee, I would rather have to remind you about obesity...!

But, coffee doesn't make you fat. And, don't get me started on what makes one fat. I've spent too much time on nutrition blogs, to rehash what I've learned over the last year.

I am a Latin Rite Catholic who loves Eastern Catholicism, especially spirituality.
Instead of arguing what is "better" (everything is "better" what is based on the truth and santification), it would be better that on this "byzantine" forum to speak (I, myself, to learn) about this "way" in Christian faith.
Personally, I think that I can be enriched by Eastern Catholic believers, and am happy to have that beauty of Liturgy, spirituality etc. in my Catholic Church.
This forum and site as well others is a great oportunity for Eastern Catholics to share "hidden treasure" so we Latin Rite Catholics, can not only to introduce ourselves, but to appreciate more something what is equally Catholic and orthodox as Latin Rite Catholicism.

Same thing's true here, was born, baptized, confirmed, and made first communion in the Latin Rite Church, but I spent a lot of my childhood also in the Byzantine Faith as well, as an altar boy yet. Although I'm primarily still Latin Rite Catholic, I do spend some times throughout the year in the Eastern Rite celebrating for certain occasions. Plus I'm sure there are times to worship in both Rites during certain times of the calendar year. Whether it be for a special festival in which the Divine Liturgy is part of the package, like the Heritage Day Festival at Holy Spirit, or any of the various Ukrainian Festivals at Ukrainian Catholic churches, etc... Although, if given the choice I could celebrate Christmas or Easter Liturgies in the Eastern Rite one day, then Western Rite the other (like the vigils in the Latin Church, and Easter and Christmas themselves in the Eastern Church). Hey, where I live, the Catholic Church is such a melting pot between the East and West, it's almost good to experience both sides of the Catholic spectrum.

Not to mention that between Latin or Slavonic, I'd like to think that Slavonic's an easier language to catch on to, imo. I mean, sure Latin is the original language of the Catholic Church as we know it, but after St. John Chrysostom and the Eastern Church of Constantinopole became Catholic, this brought the Slavonic language into the fold, and to me, it just sounds like a better language for the church. Living in between a Polish and a Ukrainian neighborhood, even though we have Latin Rite and Byzantine Rite Catholic churches all over the place, I'd almost have to equally learn both.

Hmm. That doesn't sound too much like the St. John Chrysostom that I've studied -- nor the Constantinople I've studied either. (Not that I believe the theory that St. Andrew founded the church at Constantinople, but still ...)

She doesn't hold herself out as autocephalous. She is, having received the Tomos of autocephaly from her Mother Church empowering her to consecrate her won chrism.

That is not the proof of autocephaly, however: many autocephalous Churches, accepted as such by all the other 14, do not consecrate their own Chrism. Poland does not, and IIRC Alexandria, Jerusalem, Cyprus, the Church of Greece and Albania do not. Moscow, Romania, Serbia and the OCA consecrate their own.

And yes, officially and by its own canons, canonically, Major Archibishop Shevchuk is just that. Not patriarch.

The acceptance of a new autocephalous primate by his peers should, unless he is heretical or dissolute, be pro forma. Beyond those issues, it is quite limited what business it is of ours to go into another autocephalous Church's affairs.

As for the pallium, so Vatican II has vacated its canons from its councils of Lateran IV etc.?

but then you did:
"Other" Orthodox hierarchs? This implies your Major-Archbishop is among the Orthodox hierarchs in the diptychs of the Catholic Church. He is not. Are any of the "Orthodox hierarchs" who "refer to him as Patriarch"?

Yes, lex orandi. You also commemorate Benedict XVI in your every liturgy as your pope, no? That term has specific meaning given it by Pastor Aeternus and Vatican I&II, spelled out for your Major-Archbishop and his clergy in the Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium which your supreme pontiff (supreme authority of the church in the CCEO, IIRC) issued for you all, which preclude you and your Major-Archbishop from calling MA Shevchuk, "Patriarch Shevchuk."

Please leave us and our Orthodox hierarchs out of your argument with your Roman pontiff.

IAlmisry,

Considering how the Orthodox claim to eschew legalism, all of your arguments are exceedingly legalistic.

I'm not talking about an Orthodox Church, and I'm just holding the one about which I'm talking to the standard it has accepted.

I think you just like to bust chops to no good effect.

No its not.