0 members (),
1,799
guests, and
106
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,508
Posts417,509
Members6,161
|
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
I notice you didn't say "they love Orthodox". Were you afraid that I'd reply "For breakfast?"? (As if I would ever say such a thing! [ Linked Image] )
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,520 Likes: 10
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,520 Likes: 10 |
Also, Catholic instructions say never-Catholic Orthodox may receive, full stop. Yes, it is permitted according to Canon 671.2 in the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches: 3. Catholic ministers may licitly administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the oriental churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church, if they ask on their own for the sacraments and are properly disposed. This holds also for members of other churches, which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition as the oriental churches as far as these sacraments are concerned. Although not a part of the canons, there is--at least here in the USA-- a reminder to non-Catholic Eastern Christians to respect their own disciplines when it comes to the reception of the Holy Eucharist. For the Byzantine Orthodox, that discipline says no receiving Holy Communion in a non-Orthodox Church at all. Of course, there are pastoral situations when a non-Catholic Eastern Christian would regularly commune at a Catholic liturgy, such as if access to their own Church is very difficult or impossible. My issue would be if there are Orthodox Christians who receive the Eucharist regularly at an Eastern or Roman Catholic parish when there is an Orthodox parish within range.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Although not a part of the canons, there is--at least here in the USA-- a reminder to non-Catholic Eastern Christians to respect their own disciplines when it comes to the reception of the Holy Eucharist. For the Byzantine Orthodox, that discipline says no receiving Holy Communion in a non-Orthodox Church at all. Indeed, something which bothers many of our fellow Catholics, in my experience. I like to remind them that even we Catholics are not usually permitted to request communion from any non-Catholic minister (particularly if we have access to a Catholic minister).
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,712 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,712 Likes: 1 |
You're Melkite, right? To be fair, there is the inconsistency between Orthodox/Melkite practice in the homeland (intercommunion in Syria by immemorial custom) and in America (which follows the rules).
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 294
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 294 |
Has anyone read the article "The Myth of Schism" by a lay Orthodox theologian. The author maintains that in the Ottoman empire and in parts of the Near East, there was Latin-Orthodox intercommunion before the 18th Cent. Not only that, Latin clergy in some of those regions were even under Orthodox ordinaries. I cannot imagine any sort of set up like that in Eastern Europe since the history of Catholic-Orthodx animosities is more acute. One thing a previous ROCOR hierarch once mentioned was that at Orthodox places of pilgrimages in places like Pochaev, uneducated Greek Catholics were admitted to communion since they were ignorant of differences between the Orthodox Church and their own Greek Catholic Church...educated Greek Catholics were not admitted because they were aware of the differences (back then, you could tell by vesture and demeanour who was educated, I suppose).
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,712 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,712 Likes: 1 |
Haven't read it. It may be true!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Has anyone read the article "The Myth of Schism" by a lay Orthodox theologian? Yes I've been in at least one discussion about it. It is (like many other things) seized upon by some Catholics as a polemic to use against Orthodox "stubbornness".
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 78
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 78 |
Has anyone read the article "The Myth of Schism" by a lay Orthodox theologian. The author maintains that in the Ottoman empire and in parts of the Near East, there was Latin-Orthodox intercommunion before the 18th Cent. Not only that, Latin clergy in some of those regions were even under Orthodox ordinaries. I cannot imagine any sort of set up like that in Eastern Europe since the history of Catholic-Orthodx animosities is more acute. At that time, because schools were few in number, Jesuits had been invited by the Greeks into the Ottoman Empire in order to help teach the Orthodox flock and to take on pastoral functions, even sometimes acting as confessors. The Jesuits, while in the Ottoman Empire, encouraged Orthodox Christians to make acts of submission to the Pope but without ever formally defecting from the Orthodox Church, even encouraging them to commune in Orthodox parishes and to keep their defection a secret. This laid down the groundwork for the schism in the Antiochian Patriarchate, and almost created a similar schism in the Alexandrian Patriarchate. This in turn set the stage for the Oros of 1755 which commanded that all Latins were to be received by baptism, as the Ecumenical Patriarchate found itself to be waging all of a sudden a defensive war of sorts, against this type of ecclesiastical subterfuge (at least from the Orthodox perspective). Metropolitan Kallistos touches on this topic in his book Eustratios Argenti.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15
Global Moderator Member
|
Global Moderator Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,090 Likes: 15 |
You're Melkite, right? To be fair, there is the inconsistency between Orthodox/Melkite practice in the homeland (intercommunion in Syria by immemorial custom) and in America (which follows the rules). To be accurate, there was a period several decades back when the 'rules' were less strictly observed in the US - particularly in the Northeast. Many years, Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,036 Likes: 4
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,036 Likes: 4 |
In their case, receiving the Mysteries from a Catholic priest means becoming Catholic. In forming our Knights of Columbus council, we had to deal with this. We have parishioners who still identify as Orthodox, but receive in our parish. I think this worked its way all the way up to Supreme, and possibly our Supreme Chaplain (a bishop). The decision was that an Orthodox receiving Communion in a Catholic church is in Communion with Rome and Catholic, without any formal rejection of Orthodoxy. hawk
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
This is, in fact, what also occurs in the UGCC - and the same perspective obtains.
Alex
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 569 Likes: 2
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 569 Likes: 2 |
Timothy Ware, now Metr. Kallistos of Diokleia, published a monograph on this decades ago!
|
|
|
|
|