The Eastern Contribution to the Universal Church

[Michie]

There is swelling expectation for the reunification of the Orthodox back into the Catholic Church, as Pope Leo XIV begins his Pontificate with a message of unity pointed at the Eastern churches.

“And they conversed there in the church a whole year: and they taught a great multitude, so that at Antioch the disciples were first named Christians” (Acts 11:26).

On May 14, in his “Address to Participants in the Jubilee of Oriental Churches,” Pope Leo XIV not only praised “the unique spiritual and sapiential traditions that they preserve, and for all that they have to say to us about the Christian life, synodality, and the liturgy,” he also highlighted how the Oriental Churches have “a unique and privileged role as the original setting where the Church was born.”

The term “Eastern” or “Oriental” often is interpreted to refer to the churches that grew out of the liturgy and traditions of the ancient Church of Constantinople (the Byzantine Church), capital of the Eastern half of the Roman Empire, as well as those churches that formed in communities from present-day Egypt through Syria, Iraq, Ethiopia, and India. While our Christian faith vis-à-vis the Catholic Church flourished and developed in the West, the doctrinal and juridical structure as we know it today emanated from the East.

Continued below.

The Eastern Contribution to the Universal Church

There is swelling expectation for the reunification of the Orthodox back into the Catholic Church, as Pope Leo XIV begins his Pontificate with a message of unity pointed at the Eastern churches.

crisismagazine.com

 

[prodromos]

There is swelling expectation for the reunification of the Orthodox back into the Catholic Church, as Pope Leo XIV begins his Pontificate with a message of unity pointed at the Eastern churches.

I read the article and found nothing at all to support the above statement. Was it just click bait?

 

[Michie]

I read the article and found nothing at all to support the above statement. Was it just click bait?

I think that might lie in the eye of the beholder.

 

[prodromos]

I think that might lie in the eye of the beholder.

Can you quote where you see it in the article?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I read the article and found nothing at all to support the above statement. Was it just click bait?

Makes no sense since the EO ARE Catholic...just not ROMAN catholic

 

[Michie]

Makes no sense since the EO ARE Catholic...just not ROMAN catholic

Can you quote where you see it in the article?

See what?

 

[prodromos]

See what?

A swelling expectation for the reunification of the Orthodox back into the Catholic Church

 

[tampasteve]

There is hope, in Catholic circles - but Orthodox on the ground are clearly against it. Even if the Patriarchs somehow managed to put a deal together the people would never accept it, which frankly tells a lot about the divisions that are in place and which side is really the impediment to reconciliation.

 

[jas3]

There is hope, in Catholic circles - but Orthodox on the ground are clearly against it. Even if the Patriarchs somehow managed to put a deal together the people would never accept it, which frankly tells a lot about the divisions that are in place and which side is really the impediment to reconciliation.

If Pope Leo put together a deal to annul the last 14 ecumenical councils, would you expect the Catholic laity to accept it?

 

[Michie]

A swelling expectation for the reunification of the Orthodox back into the Catholic Church

Well I see it as hopeful. Not so much expectation. We know what we are up against for the most part.

 

[prodromos]

There is hope, in Catholic circles - but Orthodox on the ground are clearly against it. Even if the Patriarchs somehow managed to put a deal together the people would never accept it, which frankly tells a lot about the divisions that are in place and which side is really the impediment to reconciliation.

In Orthodox theology, the Church is protected against falling in to error, not any one, or even group of bishops. The Church is the body of Christ and it is an impossibility for Christ to be in error. It is incumbent on all its members to hold fast to the traditions handed down, not just its bishops or even one particular bishop. We have suffered many heretical bishops in the past and will suffer more in the future, but the Church will prevail.

 

[RileyG]

In Orthodox theology, the Church is protected against falling in to error, not any one, or even group of bishops. The Church is the body of Christ and it is an impossibility for Christ to be in error. It is incumbent on all its members to hold fast to the traditions handed down, not just its bishops or even one particular bishop. We have suffered many heretical bishops in the past and will suffer more in the future, but the Church will prevail.

That’s what the RCC teaches about the Church as well.

 

[RileyG]

Makes no sense since the EO ARE Catholic...just not ROMAN catholic

Could you consider yourself evangelical or Pentecostal even? No, I’m talking about the meaning of the word, not the actual Protestant denominations by those name

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Could you consider yourself evangelical or Pentecostal even? No, I’m talking about the meaning of the word, not the actual Protestant denominations by those name

Huh?? The EO IS Catholic and has always been such.

 

[tampasteve]

Huh?? The EO IS Catholic and has always been such.

Come on, you are in the Catholic sub here, you know what he means, there is no need for disingenuous comments.

 

[tampasteve]

In Orthodox theology, the Church is protected against falling in to error, not any one, or even group of bishops. The Church is the body of Christ and it is an impossibility for Christ to be in error. It is incumbent on all its members to hold fast to the traditions handed down, not just its bishops or even one particular bishop. We have suffered many heretical bishops in the past and will suffer more in the future, but the Church will prevail.

I am well aware of what the EO church claims, but thank you for taking the time to write it out.

 

[tampasteve]

If Pope Leo put together a deal to annul the last 14 ecumenical councils, would you expect the Catholic laity to accept it?

Since the Eastern Orthodox church is largely synodal the change would be saying the councils apply to the Western Patriarchate and not to the church Universal. So yes, I believe the laity would accept it on those grounds.

 

[RileyG]

Huh?? The EO IS Catholic and has always been such.

I meant the description. If someone calls themselves Catholic with a capital C, they are in communion with Rome. Lowercase c, catholic, means universal.

 

[jas3]

Since the Eastern Orthodox church is largely synodal the change would be saying the councils apply to the Western Patriarchate and not to the church Universal. So yes, I believe the laity would accept it on those grounds.

Even that would effectively be an annulment of Constantinople 869, Florence, and Vatican I, at least, probably a few others depending on what anathemas they contain. I think you're overly optimistic about how receptive Catholics would be to papal infallibility and the filioque being limited in scope.

More to the point, your assertion amounts to, "if the other side's hierarchy were somehow on our side, their laity would still be on their side." It doesn't reflect on either side's actual resistance to union because it begins with an unexplained massive shift in beliefs in the highest levels of the other church.

 

[tampasteve]

I think you're overly optimistic about how receptive Catholics would be to papal infallibility and the filioque being limited in scope.

I probably am overly optimistic, sadly. However, as it is now Eastern Catholics don't have to say the filioque (although they have to accept it)

More to the point, your assertion amounts to, "if the other side's hierarchy were somehow on our side, their laity would still be on their side." It doesn't reflect on either side's actual resistance to union because it begins with an unexplained massive shift in beliefs in the highest levels of the other church.

My assertion is that even if all the issues were miraculously ironed out, which would require compromises from both sides of course, the laity on the Catholic side would be more accepting of the situation than the laity on the Orthodox side. It really makes sense on a "real world" level as the EO is less centralized so an agreement is less likely to be agreed by everyone than the RCC where the centrality makes it more likely to be accepted by the laity.
Let's face it, even if it happened, schism would still be the result as there would be a good number of both Orthodox and Catholics that wouldn't accept it. We would end up with some Orthodox synods that would not agree to it and we would end up with some new "Catholic" Church with an unknown number of Bishops leaving for that group.