Views on the Eastern and Western Catholic Churches?

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Let this be very very clearly understood Yeshua

I have never stated , and I will never state, that I am in Communion with Orthodoxy.

I am NOT a member of the Latin Church and never have been. I am a member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church .

I respect Orthodoxy too much to post anything against the Orthodox Churches and their beliefs and praxis and I never will .

Correct...you are NOT in communion with The Orthodox Catholic Church....you ARE in communion with the church of Rome.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Just because there is a communion between two groups does not mean we agree with each other on all things. This is evident within the Orthodox Communion as well, does the Russian Orthodox Church agree 100% with the Church of Constantinople?

Yes they do within the bounds of theology. The only difference between them is language and custom (tradition).

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I do not need to, you have already said that you are in communion with Rome...

If you are in communion with the church of Rome then you adhere to its theology and follow their tenets. You must remember that the Orthodox church is Catholic and has always been. The church of Rome was but one patriarchate within it until the schism when it expanded its reach beyond its borders.

you are NOT in communion with The Orthodox Catholic Church....you ARE in communion with the church of Rome.

Ironically, if I may say, some of the dynamics in telling other ECs what they believe (even when they say they do not) are no different than what has happened within Orthodoxy whenever others have been told they were "judaizers" and doing other things out of line with the Church simply because of Jewish focus being emphasized or supporting the Israeli State on certain points (As well as pointing out priests doing so) or celebrating Jewish Festivals the Apostles did - as mentioned in the Happy Hanukkah thread as well as the "judaizing" thread you made on the issue before the one on Hanukkah. In the same way it was not appreciated then when it came to stereotyping or placing words in the mouths of people, it is no different now with the ECs when they have explained themselves.

As it concerns the facts on what ECs feel, other well-respected Orthodox organizations have done a lot in regards to breaking down what others actually hold to - Kevin Allen did so once whenspeaking with Melkite (Eastern Catholic) priest Father James Babcock about the similarities and differences between Eastern Orthodox, Eastern Catholics and the Roman Catholic Church.

• 168 - Eastern Catholics - Are They “Orthodox”? - The Illumined Heart - Ancient Faith Radio

• Eastern Catholics - Ancient Faith Radio

There was also an excellent exchange between a Melkite Greek Catholic priest, Fr. Philip Kairallah and Fr. John Meyendorff from a 1986 St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly Journal....with it being the case that Fr. Philip’s article “The Ecumenical Vocation of the Melkite Church” received an initial response by Fr. John: “The Melkite Patriarchate: Paradoxes of a Vocation" (as seen here with both articles ). The extent of showing how many things really have not changed since then is very fascinating...

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I just am trying to wrap my head around the fact that there is the EOC, ECC and RCC (Western Catholic Church). It gets a bit mind-boggling even before you add in all the Protestant faiths.


Thank you,

SS

If I may say...

Sometimes, what can help (if you're a visual person) is having a picture of how things slowly evolved. There are some good charts that can help with that (if interested), one of them showing the different districts and where things branched out from each.

​

Explaining the above, there are five original Patriarchs out of Jeruslam: Carthage, Rome, Antioch, Edessa, and Alexandria - all of which were established by the Apostles. There later came two others: Moscow - because it was evangelized over a thousand years ago by Sts. Cyril and Methodious. ..and the Malakarese and Malabarese, which are from St. Thomas the Apostle (and those are in the India region ). With this in mind, what is noted is that there are seven Patriarcates. And we can see this, in example, with the Melkite Greek Byzantine Catholic Church - a branch which is in Communion with Rome. It was case, during the separation of the Eastern Churches, that it never left Rome - but the Melkites have a sort of Communion with the Antiochean Greek Orthodox, which is considered a Bridge Church in many ways.

There are a lot of big difficulties for those who are Eastern Catholics..

As another EO noted elsewhere, "So much of Eastern Catholicism is IN Orthodoxy - you cannot study Eastern Catholicism in isolation." ....and on the issue, as another noted best:

Melkites certainly know the precarious situation they occupy in the great scheme of Apostolic Christianity, and I do not think my brother Neil needs a reminder of that from anyone. Nevertheless, it does not follow that Melkites are more akin to the west than the east (wishful thinking perhaps?), your argument would have to be a lot more cogent and logical to establish that.

First, though there may be individual Orthodox who personally do not believe Melkites have a valid priesthood, it is not their place to judge these matters. In fact that is not the official stance of the church. Orthodox certainly see all Catholics as Christians, regardless of the fact that many are not in communion with us. The church is not in the business of pronouncing judgment upon other Christian bodies nor their sacraments, and neither expects nor seeks decrees of validation upon itself from outside.

Holy Orthodoxy routinely accords Roman Catholic hierachs respect, and neither endorses Roman Catholic orders nor condemns Roman Catholic orders. They are outside of the church, and are of no use to Orthodox.

Although it is not a formal practice, it is known that Melkite Catholics in Syria very often are communed in Melkite Orthodox churches as a matter of economia. I don't know if Syrian Latin-rite Catholics are accorded this same privilige. The special conditions there, as Christian minorities of a common sort, make it necessary. Many families, even whole towns, are mixed and often only one temple is allowed to be erected in a community. I know of at least one case of a temple being built specifically for use by both the Melkite Catholics and the Melkite (Antiochian) Orthodox, for separate liturgies and altars.

Because of it's more extensive network of parishes in North America, many Melkite Catholic immigrants from Syria and Lebanon worship in Antiochian Orthodox parishes, raising their children as Orthodox.

The reason, actually the only significant reason, Melkites are not in formal Communion and concelebration with Holy Orthodoxy is because the Melkites are in Communion with Rome. The issues in play are the errors Rome teaches, and RC attempts to assert those errors upon others. By sharing communion with the bishop of Rome and other bishops under Rome who teach these errors (out of charity no doubt, in the sense of love), the Melkite Catholics are formally cut off from the larger communion of Holy Orthodoxy.

I view this as a terrible sacrifice on their part.

In their efforts to keep the pipeline between east and west open for Rome the Melkites pay a very high price indeed, and I believe they know it. I do not think that fact is appreciated enough by most Latin Catholics nor latinized Eastern Catholics. To put it mildly it is a thankless position for them to be in.

​

That said, I do think it really is unfortunate whenever people think that Eastern Catholics all universally serve Rome - for as it has never been just Roman Catholicism with Byzantine Liturgy and plenty of Eastern Catholics (as well as Eastern Orthodox) have noted that stereotype before when it comes to what actually goes down (more shared before here and here). Others have often had the issue come close to home when it comes to having family in differing traditions - I've had friends and family who had the same experience. I myself grew up with it (as mentioned before)

Something to keep in mind is that Intercommunion agreements can sometimes be worked out between bodies with valid sacraments, even though the bodies are not united. What's interesting to consider is that Melkite Greek Catholics and The Antiochian Orthodox are very close in differing places places and there are indeed many places where Melkites and Antiochians receive communion in each others churches. Historically, it has been the case that the Antiochians and Melkites built a church together, with both Patriarchs blessing and dedicating the Church together in a country with many Melkites and Antiochians - this not being a necessity, but an activity of unification...and to be more specific, in the 1990s, the Antiochian Orthodox and Melkite Greek Catholics built a church, St. Paul’s, that they share in Doumar, a suburb of Damascus. More on the issue can be seen in The Melkite Initiative with the Antiochian Orthodox Church - as well as A CALL FOR UNITY – THE MELKITE SYNOD

For those who are Eastern Catholics/Byzantine Catholics , with those specific camps, there are some significant differences that many may not be aware of in all cases....as many Eastern Catholic rites are more similar to what occurs within Eastern Orthodoxy or Oriental Orthodoxy. It's often forgotten that many Eastern Catholics do not accept the Filioque, Purgatory, Transubtantion, etc - with this leading to them being deemed "herectics" by Roman Catholics and yet also accused of supporting those things by EO who do not know fully some of the backgrounds.

For those who are Jewish, interesingly enough, EC is something that has held a lot of appeal when it comes to reflecting their culture. There was a discussion on the issue elsewhere that had many great insights--entitled Can a Hebrew Catholic be comfortable in a Melkite Church? . As another noted there, the Syriac and the Chaldean/Assyrian Churches are likely the most "Semitic" traditions for a number of reasons, with their Liturgies handed down from the time when they really were Hebrew Catholics...specifically, Temple Jewish Catholics. And for other places that've given some EXCELLENT discussion on the issue:

• Byzantine Jewess
• Byzantine 101: Before Visiting an Eastern Catholic Church
  
  
• Standing Up To The Great Schism, The Great Divide, and the Great -Divorce--The Groom's Family...
  

Within the Holy Land, ECs and EOs are often having to work together on many issues when it comes to showing how to live as a citizen within the land, supporting one's country and yet promoting justice at the same time.

Elias Chacour - Archbishop of the Melkite Catholic Church - always come to mind as being excellent examples of what it means to do so.

Impact Holyland: Session 1 - Archbishop Elias Chacour

A Man of Galilee
Archbishop Elias Chacour at Montreat
Making the Holy Land Holy
Elias Chacour on Relationships in the Middle East
Archbishop Elias Chacour Unity Within Diversity: Myth or Reality?​

Elias Chacour - A Palestinian Christian Working for Peace in Israel - YouTube
Q Ideas | Elias Chacour | Standing On the Wall - YouTube


And for other examples, others coming to mind are people like Joseph Raya, one extensively involved in the American civil rights movement, and later, while serving as Archbishop of Akko, Haifa, Nazareth and all Galilee while doing extensive work with Dr. Martin Luther King (as both a co-laborer and dear friend) and other rabbis working for desegration/fair treatment toward both Jews and Blacks. Being a very controversial/radical figure in the church....helping to organize marches/often suffering alongside other blacks, he was twice beaten badly by the Ku Klux Klan....but later sought to emulate Dr.King's example with the marches over in Palestine. For a Video clip of Archbishop Raya leading a peaceful protest, 1972-08-14. He has been referenced a lot by others within Eastern Orthodoxy before - more noted in The Road to Emmaus Runs Through Harlem

 

[InnerPhyre]

If you are in communion with the church of Rome then you adhere to its theology and follow their tenets.

This is not necessarily true. There were clear differences developing between East and West centuries before the Great Schism. Those differences were not at the time great enough to break communion. East and West were constantly taking shots at each other and accusing the other side of practicing the faith incorrectly...and both sides were still in communion. It is possible that Eastern Catholics have a similar view of themselves now...disagreeing with Rome on various points, but not willing to break communion over them.

It's easy to think that the Catholics flew off the rails in 1054, but East and West grew apart gradually because of a great many factors over a long period of time. It took Cardinal Humbert being an ignorant jerk and forcing schism on the Church to make the differences stick though.

 

[ArmyMatt]

does the Russian Orthodox Church agree 100% with the Church of Constantinople?

on dogma? yes.

the issue comes from (as an example) something like 2nd Council of Lyon in 1274, which says: some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth, have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, or rashly to assert that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and not as from one.

so the problem is that they did dogmatically condemn those who omit the filioque, but now they don't, and claim that the Church in Rome is what has preserved the Truth.

 

[StRestlessHeart333]

well, from what I gathered they reject the use of the filioque in their use of the Creed for one, and in terms of practice they do not treat the Pope the way that the Latin Rite folks do, but more of the first among equals role.

Thank you for explaining

 

[GoingByzantine]

on dogma? yes.

Not the best example on my part. My apologies.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

What is often forgotten in these spats is that both Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics have been suppressed by Western Christianity, and in that we have a commonality with each other. Many Latin Catholics view us as an interesting little quirk, even though we should be treated as equals with Roman Catholics. Even today, many Eastern Catholic Churches are forbidden to have married priests in the United States...because the Latin bishops think it would cause confusion.

The marriage dynamic is rather wild - in light of where those from the Middle East (or in Diaspora as a result of being forced out due to fighting/conflicts there) have brought over their traditions of married priests and it has been growing. On one of the paces that covered that best:

• A Quiet Revolution - Orthocath

• Melkite Catholic Church to Ordain Married Men to Priesthood in USA — Updated Report | Orthocath

That said, I do think it's more than fair to note where many within the Latin camp have been suppressing many things in regards to the EC world - and yet on the same token, it can be said that many on the Latin side have also been misrepresented when it comes to the ways others in their world have never been for oppressing EC (just as not all EOs are universally against any kind of relationship or work with Rome due to the concept of honor). Some critiques of Rome can be pretty sharp - and yet necessary, as with the work of others like Fr. John Romanidies when it comes to seeing the ways the Roman Empire developed (more in THE ROMANS Ancient, Medieval and Modern ). But even with that, it is not as if all things from Rome are automatically bad and all things from the East are automatically "good" - there were a lot of things (both good and bad) coming out of both sides for a myriad of complicated reasons...

It is unfortunate to see the ways that Christ has been misrepresented by the Western culture - although I tend to pause whenever it seems the blame is thrown onto the West as if the East alone kept all things good. (with one key example of bad things in the East being what occurred in the Byzantine Empire when it came to the treatment of the Ghassanids - which were a buffer for the enemies of the empire and yet home for many Eastern Christians who were not Byzantine).

As much as folks harp against the West...technically, from an Old World perspective (when going as far back as Rome in the time of Jesus and what occurred later when the Empire moved its capital to Constantinople and was impacted by Constantine, who later became the Western Roman Emperor, and Eastern Roman Emperor ) the reality is that Jesus was both situated in an Eastern AND Western mindset - and that becomes even more present when seeing how far the Gospel spread to within the first century. ...but many, in not remembering that, end up assuming anything connected with Jesus in the Western world is automatically negative.

And of course, as negative as it can be with many of the ways the Western world has misrepresented Jesus and giving bad experiences as you've noted, it's equally tragic whenever others end up not encountering MUCH of the Western world that was never akin to that (and actually in line with the mindsets of what Jesus advocated) - that also goes in connection with seeing Jesus from a Global context.

I'm glad for the Orthodox who've said that there's a need for having humility when examining other groups outside of Orthodoxy:

• Tight shoes, Good Samaritan, and Roman Catholics | OrthoCuban

We “worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Church.” But, those Orthodox who keep expecting God to not work with anyone else are quite mistaken. God has continued to work the the “larger” kingdoms, like the Roman Catholic Church. Exactly as he did in the Old Testament, so our God who does not change is doing now. He has continued to send prophets to those who are mistaken and worship wrongly. He has continued to work with them through his Holy Spirit, even though they are mistaken, for his promises are unchangeable.

I think this is the explanation as to why God has not permitted another Ecumenical Council or permitted the Orthodox to name a replacement Patriarch of the West or to declare that the Church of the West is completely ended and that a new one must be raised in its place. I think our spiritual insides recognize that God is at work and that somehow we are reliving in the Church part of what happened at the time that the United Monarchy split into the two kingdoms. Yes, they are wrong and need to return to truth, but they are not so wrong as some Orthodox would write nor are they so devoid of the Holy Spirit as many Orthodox would care to believe. And, there yet remains hope of a reunification, a time when “Israel” and “Judah” will become one again.​

 

[ArmyMatt]

Not the best example on my part. My apologies.

no worries mate. that actually was something very important. Inner is exactly right that in many ways the East and West differed for a while prior to the Schism. the problem is that Rome today is not the same as the Rome of the Schism. they have, unfortunately, drifted further from what they once were.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I think this heterogeneity is possible due to the status of eastern Catholicism in the US. It is a bit of a disregarded step-child to Rome. I think many eastern Catholics really see themselves as a bridge between east and west. In my experience they tend to be eastern in custom, western in polity, and a hybrid theologically. The churches seem to be very ecumenically minded. I have known EC churches to accept EO, OO, and even Anglicans with open arms - quicker than they accept RC.

Very true

Slightly off topic - and I feel like this might be a topic in another thread but I could not find it - but I would not be surprised if the RCC absorbs the Church of the East in the next few years, what's left of it.

The RCC have connected with certain aspects of the Church of the East. In example, Bishop Mar Bawai Soro - a former Bishop of the Assyrian Church of the East and an Assyrian Catholic bishop and ecumenist whose passion and life's work have been aimed at the attainment of Christ's prayer for the unity of the Church - "that they may be one" (John 17:21)....he was crucial in the dialogue with the Catholic Church, during which time the signing of the "Common Christological Declaration" became a landmark event, ending theological isolation of this Church for 15 centuries...and in leaving the Assyrian Church of the East, he led a significant minority of the Assyrian Church of the East's faithful into full communion with the Chaldean Catholic Church (more here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here).

That said, the Church of the East is QUITE resistant in multiple ways on all ways with Rome (just as they have been with Orthodox) - other Eastern Orthodox have done an excellent job in breaking down the ways that they understand life to be and why they would not wish to convert to either RCC or EO...One excellent resource is [/url] East Meets East: What East Meets East is about , which focuses on showing the history of interaction and what people can learn on the matter. For them, they've been on their own long before the Great Schism and have experienced many things other parts of the Body have not. And with the plight Of The Assyrian Christians Of Iraq And Syria currently, many have felt that the Diaspora occurring from persecution will lead to a more reinforced ideology of remembering their distinction/history and not simply converting over to another camp which may see it as opportunistic to take them on.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

That would never happen, Anhelyna! Putin hasn't been helping the rebels at all! It'll simmer down!

As I always say - I'm not ready to 'dox

Something - that inexplicable 'something' holds me back - and I'm pretty certain that ECs who were originally RC [ Latin Catholic] will say something along the lines of , they wish to remain in Communion with the Holy Father.

What will be interesting to see is , should the unimaginable happen in Ukraine and the UGCC is either wiped out or goes underground again, what our Hierarchs will do.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Ironically, if I may say, some of the dynamics in telling other ECs what they believe (even when they say they do not)

Not at all Gxg. In the end I only stated what she stated...

"Correct...you are NOT in communion with The Orthodox Catholic Church....you ARE in communion with the church of Rome."

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Not at all Gxg. In the end I only stated what she stated...

"Correct...you are NOT in communion with The Orthodox Catholic Church....you ARE in communion with the church of Rome."

She did not state that, YD - that was what YOU said in response to her comment as well as other ECs -

In reference:

Let this be very very clearly understood Yeshua

I have never stated , and I will never state, that I am in Communion with Orthodoxy.

I am NOT a member of the Latin Church and never have been. I am a member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church .

TAW has been my home forum ever since I joined CF in 2005.

I respect Orthodoxy too much to post anything against the Orthodox Churches and their beliefs and praxis and I never will.

Correct...you are NOT in communion with The Orthodox Catholic Church....you ARE in communion with the church of Rome.

She noted directly where she was NOT a member of the Latin Church - but you came to insist she was in communion with the Church of Rome. That latter comment was something you already clarified on when saying that being in communion with the Church of Rome (in your view) means that one accepts all the practices of the Roman Church or Latin Church - and that is not based on fact.

It was insisted upon that because EC individuals are connected with Rome, that means they accept all the practices of the RCC. That is nowhere near accurate when it comes to the extensive dynamics behind why EC often get mistreated within RCC circles and why they get hassled for supporting a host of things people on the outside assume they support because of their association with Rome.

And on the rest of the conversation and where she and others clarified much of where they come from...

If they are in communion with the Roman pope, they are members of the church of Rome, no matter what they call themselves.

...if in communion with the Roman pope, you are a member of the church of Rome.

I'm NOT - I am a member of the UGCC which is in Communion with the Catholic Church.

And frankly this is not going to take us anywhere

If you are in communion with the church of Rome then you adhere to its theology and follow their tenets. You must remember that the Orthodox church is Catholic and has always been. The church of Rome was but one patriarchate within it until the schism when it expanded its reach beyond its borders.

Yeshua

I understand far more than you think I do about Orthodoxy . Please do not try and tell me how I should practice and what I should believe as a member of the UGCC .

I do not need to, you have already said that you are in communion with Rome...

If I were you I would look up the theological differences between the RCC and the UGCC. Then you will see that it is not the same.

Start with the Union of Brest, and work from there.

I do not need to, she has already stated that she is in communion with Rome. She is not in communion with the Orthodox Catholic Church...

I do not need to, she has already stated that she is in communion with Rome. She is not in communion with the Orthodox Catholic Church...

Let this be very very clearly understood Yeshua

I have never stated , and I will never state, that I am in Communion with Orthodoxy.

I am NOT a member of the Latin Church and never have been. I am a member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church .

TAW has been my home forum ever since I joined CF in 2005.

I respect Orthodoxy too much to post anything against the Orthodox Churches and their beliefs and praxis and I never will .

​

As said before, to insist others believe something that they have already noted they don't adhere to is never appreciated - it is no different than what occurred before after the uproar of you being accused in supporting judaizing because of the insistence on using Jewish language for Christ. And I repeat - as mentioned in the Happy Hanukkah thread as well as the "judaizing" thread you made on the issue before the one on Hanukkah.... In the same way it was not appreciated then when it came to stereotyping or placing words in the mouths of people, it is no different now with the ECs when they have explained themselves.

We have to deal with the facts - and ss it concerns the facts on what ECs feel, other well-respected Orthodox organizations have done a lot in regards to breaking down what others actually hold to - Kevin Allen did so once whenspeaking with Melkite (Eastern Catholic) priest Father James Babcock about the similarities and differences between Eastern Orthodox, Eastern Catholics and the Roman Catholic Church.

• 168 - Eastern Catholics - Are They “Orthodox”? - The Illumined Heart - Ancient Faith Radio

• Eastern Catholics - Ancient Faith Radio

There was also an excellent exchange between a Melkite Greek Catholic priest, Fr. Philip Kairallah and Fr. John Meyendorff from a 1986 St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly Journal....with it being the case that Fr. Philip’s article “The Ecumenical Vocation of the Melkite Church” received an initial response by Fr. John: “The Melkite Patriarchate: Paradoxes of a Vocation" (as seen here with both articles ). The extent of showing how many things really have not changed since then is very fascinating...

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I am a member of the UGCC which is in Communion with the Catholic Church.

And frankly this is not going to take us anywhere

True enough - it is what it is and you've been more than clear on the matter.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

.. if one looks at the councils that came out of Rome after the Schism, the Eastern Catholics are condemned along with us. modern Popes tend to downplay that though.

Pope Francis has done a lot when it comes to seeking to make Eastern Catholics more prominent so that they are not beat up alongside EOs within many of the RCC Circles - and it has been encouraging to see some of the developments. For reference:

• Pope Francis Gives New Hope to Catholic-Orthodox Reconciliation - Aleteia

• Pope Francis Allows Married Man to Join Priesthood for First Time in Nearly 100 Years

The ways the Pope has gone out of the way to honor those in Orthodoxy is very noteworthy. And As Thekla noted best once on the issue:

I can't speak from the RC side.

However, Pope Francis exhibits a phronema more closely aligned with the EO mindset. In fact, he has recently encouraged returning more "power" to the level of the episkopos - clearly a step that bodes well for re-unification (as it echoes the conciliar structure).

The disposition and some of the statements of Pope Francis perhaps indicate a movement further towards possible reconciliation.

His mindset, and his calls for shifts in the way the ekklesia is "organized" indicate a return to a more conciliar structure. The conciliar/collegial structure is what the EO has maintained; ie there is room for further movement.

Re-unification is a process; Pope Francis seems to be engaged in helping along that process.

One possibility is that Churches will keep their names, denoting affiliation (as they already do) to the particular see/region and liturgical type.

(Return of more responsibility to the episcopate in the RC also paves the way somewhat for assigning post 7th Council RC Councils as "local", ie having force in the See of Rome, but not binding for the other Sees.)

 

[ArmyMatt]

Pope Francis has done a lot when it comes to seeking to make Eastern Catholics more prominent so that they are not beat up alongside EOs within many of the RCC Circles - and it has been encouraging to see some of the developments. For reference:

• Pope Francis Gives New Hope to Catholic-Orthodox Reconciliation - Aleteia

• Pope Francis Allows Married Man to Join Priesthood for First Time in Nearly 100 Years

right, which shows a lack of dogmatic consistency. this shows how much sway one man has unfortunately, and many RC just pretend whatever the Pope has said is what the RC Church has always taught. the past number of Popes have been very East friendly, which is great. however, that has not always been the case.

what happens when/if a Pope comes along who reverts back to the Orthodox being heretical and such?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

There were clear differences developing between East and West centuries before the Great Schism. Those differences were not at the time great enough to break communion. East and West were constantly taking shots at each other and accusing the other side of practicing the faith incorrectly...and both sides were still in communion. It is possible that Eastern Catholics have a similar view of themselves now...disagreeing with Rome on various points, but not willing to break communion over them.

It's easy to think that the Catholics flew off the rails in 1054, but East and West grew apart gradually because of a great many factors over a long period of time. It took Cardinal Humbert being an ignorant jerk and forcing schism on the Church to make the differences stick though.

A lot of people hvave noted that for many ECs (if not all), the dynamic of not being willing to break with Rome is all based on the issue of not wishing to cause more division and instead remain as a bridge for others to possibly reform. In many ways, they have a view that does reflect the reality of Papal Primacy as Orthodox understand it (as The Bishop of Rome is considered to have a "primacy of honor" - and others, seeing people denounce the RCC Pope, get the impression that people think not having communion with Rome means rejecting honoring the Pope of Rome).

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Actually Gxg, she DID say that she was NOT in communion with the Orthodox church and that she WAS in communion with the Catholic church. You quoted her right in you text!

Originally Posted by Anhelyna

I am a member of the UGCC which is in Communion with the Catholic Church.

​

Let this be very very clearly understood Yeshua

I have never stated , and I will never state, that I am in Communion with Orthodoxy.

​

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Actually Gxg, she DID say that she was NOT in communion with the Orthodox church and that she WAS in communion with the Catholic church. You quoted her right in you text!

Originally Posted by Anhelyna

I am a member of the UGCC which is in Communion with the Catholic Church.

​

Let this be very very clearly understood Yeshua

I have never stated , and I will never state, that I am in Communion with Orthodoxy.

​

And again - in CONTEXT of what she noted, she was never arguing that she was in communion with Orthodoxy. What she noted was that (counter to your assertion) her being a member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church ...which was NOT the same as saying that she was for the Latin Church or the RCC - as you argued that to be in communion with Rome meant to accept ALL of its practices. That is not true and As noted earlier , It's often forgotten that many Eastern Catholics do not accept the Filioque, Purgatory, Transubtantion, etc - with this leading to them being deemed "herectics" by Roman Catholics and yet also accused of supporting those things by EO who do not know fully some of the backgrounds

She noted directly where she was NOT a member of the Latin Church - but you came to insist she was in communion with the Church of Rome. That latter comment was something you already clarified on when saying that being in communion with the Church of Rome (in your view) means that one accepts all the practices of the Roman Church or Latin Church - and that is not based on fact.

It was insisted upon that because EC individuals are connected with Rome, that means they accept all the practices of the RCC. That is nowhere near accurate when it comes to the extensive dynamics behind why EC often get mistreated within RCC circles and why they get hassled for supporting a host of things people on the outside assume they support because of their association with Rome. It's akin to arguing "You're a Assassian, no matter how much you deny it!!!" to someone that's a Surgeon because they use knives and serial killers use knives - the use of common tools does not mean that the use of it by one group is the same as another.

And on the rest of the conversation and where she and others clarified much of where they come from...

If they are in communion with the Roman pope, they are members of the church of Rome, no matter what they call themselves.

...if in communion with the Roman pope, you are a member of the church of Rome.

I'm NOT - I am a member of the UGCC which is in Communion with the Catholic Church.

And frankly this is not going to take us anywhere

If you are in communion with the church of Rome then you adhere to its theology and follow their tenets. You must remember that the Orthodox church is Catholic and has always been. The church of Rome was but one patriarchate within it until the schism when it expanded its reach beyond its borders.

Yeshua

I understand far more than you think I do about Orthodoxy . Please do not try and tell me how I should practice and what I should believe as a member of the UGCC .

I do not need to, you have already said that you are in communion with Rome...

If I were you I would look up the theological differences between the RCC and the UGCC. Then you will see that it is not the same.

Start with the Union of Brest, and work from there.

I do not need to, she has already stated that she is in communion with Rome. She is not in communion with the Orthodox Catholic Church...

I do not need to, she has already stated that she is in communion with Rome. She is not in communion with the Orthodox Catholic Church...

Let this be very very clearly understood Yeshua

I have never stated , and I will never state, that I am in Communion with Orthodoxy.

I am NOT a member of the Latin Church and never have been. I am a member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church .

TAW has been my home forum ever since I joined CF in 2005.

I respect Orthodoxy too much to post anything against the Orthodox Churches and their beliefs and praxis and I never will .

Just because there is a communion between two groups does not mean we agree with each other on all things. T

​

Being in communion does NOT mean that one groups adheres to everything that another holds to - and this goes back to not quoting people out of context or reading into their words. It was noted to you to look up the differences between EC and the RCC - and your answer was "She's in Communion with Rome"......an answer indicating one already assumes they are exactly the same rather than addressing the reality of how Rome sees others differently and gives differing treatment.

Otherwise, it's no different than when you fussed over others being inconsistent or hypocritical over the claims of judaizing in other threads.

And as said by others, one needs to understand the differences between Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics when it comes to what it means to be in communion with Rome - I repeat (as it concerns the facts on what ECs feel) that other well-respected Orthodox organizations have done a lot in regards to breaking down what others actually hold to - Kevin Allen did so once when speaking with Melkite (Eastern Catholic) priest Father James Babcock about the similarities and differences between Eastern Orthodox, Eastern Catholics and the Roman Catholic Church.

• 168 - Eastern Catholics - Are They “Orthodox”? - The Illumined Heart - Ancient Faith Radio

And as noted earlier (with regards to where EC have high respect for Orthodoxy and the same can be seen in the Orthodox respecting EC), Historically, it has been the case that the Antiochians and Melkites built a church together, with both Patriarchs blessing and dedicating the Church together in a country with many Melkites and Antiochians - this not being a necessity, but an activity of unification...and to be more specific, in the 1990s, the Antiochian Orthodox and Melkite Greek Catholics built a church, St. Paul’s, that they share in Doumar, a suburb of Damascus. More on the issue can be seen in The Melkite Initiative with the Antiochian Orthodox Church - as well as A CALL FOR UNITY – THE MELKITE SYNOD