www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Father Keleher and St Mark of Ephesus

Well, I don't believe that the terms "convert" (used by ultramontanist RC's on Orthodox for years and years) and "schism" are acceptable terms in our conversation with the Orthodox.

They presuppose that the structure of the once undivided Church was very much like that of the medieval and contemporary Latin Church - with the powerful Pope at the top of the hierarchy and the world as his diocese, in effect.

Schism on the part of the Orthodox is something that is really untenable. It is far too "black and white" and lacks the historical and theological subtleties that has characterized the Latin-East relationship.

As a UGCCer, I cannot accept it as it is an older RC modus operandi that is also a failed one - and also one repudiated by not only Vatican II but also by Catholic-Orthodox ecumenical commissions, Balamand and the like.

Rome has evolved in its understanding of these matters.

If our beginning point is that the Orthodox are in schism - that is a non-starter. Always has been, always will be.

The mutual excommunications have been lifted. What remains now is for doctrinal unity.

That can only be accomplished by means of a union Council between both sides.

I believe there is no reason why Rome, without discarding any of its traditions, cannot simply agree to hold that the faith of the first millennium is normative for all, that papal infallibility ideally occurs when Rome ratifies an Ecumenical Council and that papal jurisdictional primacy is exercised when a Particular Church calls on Rome to get involved, when a bishop/theologian calls on Rome to hear their case and/or when a church canon, accepted by all Churches as laid down by Ecumenical Council, is broken. Otherwise, "stay out of our face."

Papal power can and should have its limits with respect to Particular Churches of the East - who have taken their orthodox doctrine from the Ecumenical Councils, not from any magisterium.

Also, Rome can and should begin the process of examining what doctrines are of a "universal" and "necessary to Catholic faith" nature and which reflect Latin theologoumena and are not "necessary" to the universal Catholic faith.

Catholics hold the true faith. That doesn't mean there are issues that need to be addressed that harm unity with the East.

Eastern Catholicism is not the model for church unity any longer. It is destined to one day disappear of its own accord - once church unity is re-established.

And yes, we have our Latinized parish members. So Latinized that they want what the Latin Church has for our Church - including altar girls and women reading the epistle, women extraordinary ministers and the like. We already have this and more thanks to that kind of Latinization.

But to suggest, as is sometimes suggested here, that the model of church unity is simply a matter of getting the Orthodox to "see it our way" and that any other approach is somehow a betrayal of Catholicism - that is just too overly simplistic and is not where Rome is at today.

Alex

Alex, as my friend often says, "we're figuring things out, but no one's bothering to listen to us."

"Yes" AND "born Orthodox get the benefit of the doubt." In other words, the branch theory isn't Catholic.

I know it's uncool here, but our doctrine's not negotiable. That's right, the mystalicious Orthodox would have to admit they're embarrassing, retrograde, boring CATHOLICS.

Our polity except the papacy and episcopate is entirely negotiable.

I don't know young fogey, maybe it is just me because I am Orthodox, but I am getting a little tired of your vitriol towards the Orthodox. It is of course your prerogative, and you are correct in that this is a Catholic website...

We were ONE church...one side is as incomplete as the other, so instead of listening to your type of attitude, I rather let our esteemed clergy that have been commissioned to work this all out, be led by love and the Holy Spirit into an understanding of what kind of unity we can have.

For people of good will and the love of Christ on both sides of the divide, I personally believe that such unity exists already as a spiritual unity.

There is still one church; you are still a beloved, estranged part of us.

The Orthodox I knew in person usually weren't like most online Orthodox. Not doctrinally strict but good-hearted. Their approach was "tribal." The idea of "bloom where you're planted" (us: born Orthodox get the benefit of the doubt), C.S. Lewis' idea that the people at the centers, at the hearts, of their religious communities are closer to God and to each other than the fringe people yelling online for example. They were Orthodox because they were Greek or Russian, etc., and proud of that, but had no problem with, nay, expected Anglo-Americans to be various kinds of Protestants, Latin peoples to be Catholic, etc. But to turn your back on your own mama, papa, yiayia/baba, village, etc.? "That's crazy!" And it often is. Witness the online Orthodox circus. For a Westerner, converting to Orthodoxy is a self-hating act. Joining Greek Catholicism is not. Because one is not leaving the church.

Granted, Christianity is both tribal and propositional/universal (not phyletist), but as the late Fr. Serge (Keleher) told me in person, small-o orthodoxy has tensions in it, paradoxes, and this is one of them: it's both particular and universal.

YF's colors are shining through..

If your point is that Catholic "apologists" should stop attacking the Orthodox for not embracing said theory, then I'm behind you 1000%.

Why don't you all just become a nonsectarian version of orthodoxchristianity.net, then? Police it by restricting uncool Catholic posts to one or two clearly defined folders. Your prerogative.

Ha ha ha.

Seriously, our doctrine is not a branch theory. Estranged part of one church ≠ divided church. Semantics? Not really.

I understand how you're bothered by Catholics "schisming" to become Orthodox (just as I understand how Orthodox are bothered by Orthodox "schisming" to become Catholic) but I honestly cannot believe you just said ^^ that.

This thread is confirmation of the ancient synodical principle,"None of us individually is as stupid as all of us together." Some come impressively close, though!

Yes and no (or really and not really ). Read a bunch of Catholic internet-apologists and you're bound to see some pretty shameless semantic exercises.

Edit: not to mention Catholic propaganda like "While Patriarch Bartholomew may be ahead of many of his brethren in his openness to Rome, most of them are on the trail he is blazing, not the side route that Young and Schaeffer have strayed onto."
- This Rock, also quoted by Fr Reardon in the article mentioned earlier

It is an interesting conversation in any case. I was aware, already, that there are not just two possible p.o.v.s ("us and them" as some might put it) ... but this thread really drives that fact home.

Catholics and Orthodox both believe they have the true Faith and that their respective Churches are the ONLY true ones - that is a fact.

The point of this forum is to allow for a "neutral zone" where the two can meet and discuss matters of mutual interest without denigrating each other in the hope that one will convert to the other.

There are Orthodox who have tried to convert me - and I didn't appreciate that at all, so I removed myself from the entire situation. To this day, I won't go into an Orthodox Church, other than for weddings and funerals, because I've had one too many such experiences in the past where not only my own EC allegiance was, shall we say, "not appreciated" but also my church. No one should stand for that, on either side.

Any ecumenical conversation, such as should be had here, must be free of the "threat of proselytism." That is a principle that the Catholic Church accepts too.

It is perfectly legitimate to affirm what one personally believes about schism etc. I just don't believe that has any place here and haven't heard the word "schism" used for years before I came across it here.

I'm a born UGCC and half of my family, here and in Ukraine, is Orthodox. The only time anyone decided to become Catholic was following St John Paul the Great's trip to Ukraine when he beatified new Martyrs there. He made such an impression that some Orthodox, like two of my relatives, became EC, some secular people became religious and tepid EC's became fervent.

I understand and love all that. I know all about the branch theory of Anglicanism and how some Catholics can closely approximate it.

That has NOTHING to do with the ecumenical atmosphere which should exist on this forum. That it is "Byzantine Catholic" and warmly embraces Orthodox Christians is, in and of itself, a great testimony to Catholic openness. There are Orthodox Christians who are Moderators here, such as our beloved Alice (on whose nerves I do get on) and Father Anthony.

And these Orthodox Christians themselves demonstrate great Christian love and understanding of us Cath'lics. Alice's warm embrace of true Christian piety in both traditions and her always very positive comments about Catholicism are well known - appreciated by all.

I once got angry at a UGCC poster from Poland for attacking our Primate. OK, so I tore him a new . . . navel.

Fr. Anthony came on and actually understood my anger completely. Rather than chide me for it, he told the other fellow to observe the bounds of order and decency. I almost fell out of my chair, but that is the kind of high quality of person he is and this Forum is better for having him on board.

That such excellent individuals embrace, and are embraced by, the Byzantine Catholic Forum says a great deal about the Forum and about the Administrator whose vision has led to the development of such an ecumenical community.

To sit down with Orthodox Christians, look them in the eye (figuratively, of course) and share our mutual experiences as Christians is the sine qua non of ultimate reunion.

Anything less will set the reunion clock back and that would be a tragedy and even a great sin.

We are all here to advance the cause of Christ and the unity of His Church.

Let's keep focused on the positive things of our traditions. If we centre ourselves on the following of Christ within our respective Churches, we will truly become one in the same Christ.

I think this thread, which I began, has come full circle and I ask the Administrator and the Moderators to consider closing it down.

Thank you for your attention.

As Fr. Keleher of blessed memory once wrote to me in a letter: "May St Mark of Ephesus pray for us."

Alex