Topic: Papist's Criticism of Byzantine Rite Catholicism

[Heracleides]

Exactly!

I was an Eastern Catholic and was often told by clergy and laity alike that it is not mandatory to hold the same understandings on issues and doctrines as that of the Latin Church such as: Filoque, papal infallibility, IC, and purgatory, original sin, etc.

It caused a confusing dichotmy in my mind. I thought to myself: "These issues and doctrines are innovations of the post-schism Latin Church. As Eastern Catholics, why do we not come into union with Holy Orthodoxy."

I was strernly rebuked for such remarks.

I was consistently told to study Orthodoxy, to worship like the Orthodox, to hold Orthodox theological precepts and praxis, but do not be Orthodox---they are schismatics!!!

I was injured by the identity crisis in the Eastern Catholic Church and I was opposed to the innovations of Rome. So I made the only logical decision. I joined the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church---the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church! 

Mickey, I have followed your journey to Holy Orthodoxy on many fora and I simply want to chime in and say that we are all greatly blessed by your presence & witness.

[Papist]

Mickey, I have followed your journey to Holy Orthodoxy on many fora and I simply want to chime in and say that we are all greatly blessed by your presence.

I would like to add that although I lament the loss of Mickey in the Roman Catholic Church, he is one of the most charitable and loving Orthodox Christians that I have ever come across on line. I could learn alot form him and I think he is an alround great guy.

[Mickey]

Mickey, I have followed your journey to Holy Orthodoxy on many fora and I simply want to chime in and say that we are all greatly blessed by your presence & witness.

Thank you my brother in Christ. It has been a bumpy road--filled with abundant tears and glorious triumphs. I have been blessed by many of your posts. (and others)

[Mickey]

Were you originally a Latin Catholic? If so, what made you change cannonical status?

One Divine Liturgy and I was hooked by the East! (my wife too) 

[Mickey]

I would like to add that although I lament the loss of Mickey in the Catholic Church, he is one of the most charitable and loving Orhtodox Christians that I have ever come across on line. I could learn alot form him and I think he is an alround great guy.

Thank you my brother in Christ. You are damaging my quest for humility! 

We have had our differences in the past, but I am grateful that we have come to a place where we can converse amicably in all Christian charity.

[Papist]

One Divine Liturgy and I was hooked by the East! (my wife too) 

I have to admitt that the Divine Liturgy had me hooked on my old Ruthenian Parish for a good year. There were many things about the Easte that I loved, but when all was said and done, I am a Thomist, through and through. But I certainly understand you attraction to such a beautiful Liturgy.  I actually prefer the Byzanite over the the Tridentine Rite.

[Mickey]

I have to admitt that the Divine Liturgy had me hooked on my old Ruthenian Parish for a good year. There were many things about the East that I loved, but when all was said and done, I am a Thomist, through and through. But I certainly understand your attraction to such a beautiful Liturgy.  I actually prefer the Byzanite over the the Tridentine Rite.

I have very fond memories of the old Latin Mass of my childhood. Even though I could not understand a lick of Latin, the Liturgy somehow spoke to my heart (like Church Slavonic does today). I was saddened when the Novus Ordo swept the country (but that is for another thread).

I am not a big fan of Aquinas. Thomism is not very appealing to me and the way he delivers his odd mixture of Aristotlean/Platonic philosophy hurts my head. Scholasticism is not my cup of tea. However, I must admit I am intrigued that he did not finish the Summa because he had a mystical experience. He claimed that all his writings were as straw. I wonder about this vision/experience. He died shortly thereafter. Could it have been the uncreated light? Perhaps he was moving toward Holy Orthodoxy! 

[Papist]

I have very fond memories of the old Latin Mass of my childhood. Even though I could not understand a lick of Latin, the Liturgy somehow spoke to my heart (like Church Slavonic does today). I was saddened when the Novus Ordo swept the country (but that is for another thread).

You are gonna laught at me but I actually prefer the NO over the Tridentine rite, as long as the NO is celebrated properly. My pastor celebrated the NO ad orientem for Easter Vigil.

I am not a big fan of Aquinas. Thomism is not very appealing to me and the way he delivers his odd mixture of Aristotlean/Platonic philosophy hurts my head. Scholasticism is not my cup of tea.

That's interesting. My biggest problem with Palamite theology is his odd mixture of Neo-Platonic philosophy, especially with regard to his distinction between essence and engergies.

However, I must admit I am intrigued that he did not finish the Summa because he had a mystical experience. He claimed that all his writings were as straw. I wonder about this vision/experience. He died shortly thereafter. Could it have been the uncreated light? Perhaps he was moving toward Holy Orthodoxy! 

Goodness, I hope not!!!  Most Catholics have understood his statement about his works being straw as a profession of humility. Even the Summa, as amazing as it is, is nothing compared to God himself. No theological work can even begin to touch on who and what God is. At best they use human language to describe the undescribeable. I think St. Thomas recognized this.

[Peter J]

Wow, Papist. Reading what you've posted in this thread today ... the civility, the reasonableness, the lack of ... well never mind.

If I didn't know better I'd think I was reading a thread from last year -- you know, before the "new and improve" Papist appeared on the scene.

Is it possible Classic Papist has just been hiding inside of you?

[wynd]

Wow, Papist. Reading what you've posted in this thread today ... the civility, the reasonableness, the lack of ... well never mind.

If I didn't know better I'd think I was reading a thread from last year -- you know, before the "new and improve" Papist appeared on the scene.

Is it possible Classic Papist has just been hiding inside of you?

Now that New Papist has been taken off the market, Papist Classic will be that much more appealing. A clever marketing ploy!

[ozgeorge]

It's still full of rubbish- only sweeter.

[Mickey]

No theological work can even begin to touch on who and what God is.

Now you are sounding like a Palamist. 

[Papist]

Now you are sounding like a Palamist. 

Hey. Not everything he said was that bad. 

[username!]

I am not sure what you want me to say. I have already explained how the ECs misrepresent the Catholic faith.

You didn't complete your entire thoughts, you just ran a laundry list and didn't give a reason for the list.  A child can point out what he thinks is wrong and a man can back up and explain what he thinks is wrong.

[Papist]

You didn't complete your entire thoughts, you just ran a laundry list and didn't give a reason for the list.  A child can point out what he thinks is wrong and a man can back up and explain what he thinks is wrong.

All you asked was how I believe that the EC's misrepresent the Catholic Church. If you wanted more you should have asked for more. A real man asks the question he wants answered.

[username!]

All you asked was how I believe that the EC's misrepresent the Catholic Church. If you wanted more you should have asked for more. A real man asks the question he wants answered.

Frankly I am sick and tired of your attitude towards the Orthodox and everyone here.  I asked you to explain your laundry list, my question was full to you.  You are the one who didn't answer it correctly.  If you have such issues with Orthodoxy and with not answering questions posed to you in full and resort to accusing others of malice, why stay here?  All you have done is place broad accusations against the moderators and staff here at oc.net and towards posters here.  A real man doesn't act like a 6 year old and blame everyone but himself when he is confronted with a question.  Please go to the Byzantine Catholic thread and find where I originally said use explanations and detail for the list you provided.

[Peter J]

In my own search for the Church, people have often suggested that I become an Eastern Catholic.  This would be a way for me to have the best of both worlds (the worlds being Catholicism and Orthodoxy).

I have a great deal of respect for Eastern Catholicism; nevertheless some of the "Eastern Catholicism is the best of both worlds" conversations that I've heard (and I've heard quite a few, BTW) seemed to me little simplistic. Would that mean that WRO is the worst of both worlds?

[username!]

True, although that cuts both ways.

-Peter.

You too can expand on your observations of Eastern Catholicism through the Latin perspective, any insight to actually make this thread adhere to its original meaning.

[The Iambic Pen]

I was an Eastern Catholic and was often told by clergy and laity alike that it is not mandatory to hold the same understandings on issues and doctrines as that of the Latin Church such as: Filoque, papal infallibility, IC, and purgatory, original sin, etc.

Which, to me, says that these clergy and laity need to do the intellectually honest thing and either accept the teachings of Rome or become Orthodox.

It caused a confusing dichotmy in my mind.

Indeed it would.  It certainly confuses me.

So I made the only logical decision. I joined the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church---the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church! 

*verifies that this is the "Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion" forum, rather than "Faith Issues" or some other forum where the non-Orthodox must tread lightly  *

Well, technically, you could have decided that the Latin innovations were legitimate developments (_{like maybe Hesychasm...}) and fully embraced the fullness of Catholic (that is to say, the Church calling itself "Catholic" which holds to union with the pope, also known as the Bishop of Rome) teaching.  So, you had two choices.  Several centuries worth of brilliant men and women with a great love for God are in disagreement as to whether or not you made the right one (or were in disagreement; one imagines they know the truth of the matter now).

[Αριστοκλής]

Which, to me, says that these clergy and laity need to do the intellectually honest thing and either accept the teachings of Rome or become Orthodox.

It might be a bit more than an intellectual imperative. Rome holds that they MUST ultimately adhere to Roman dogma.

[Mickey]

So, you had two choices. 

Ultimately, yes. There was a time when I thought there was a third choice--Eastern Catholicism. I used to tell people that the pre-schism Church looked like the Eastern Catholic Church---Eastern in union with Rome. But that came crashing down on me over time. I learned that the Eastern Catholic Church used to be Orthodox. I learned that the post schism innovated doctrines of Rome were not known to the undivided Church. I learned that the fullness of truth existed in the Holy Orthodox Church.

[The Iambic Pen]

It might be a bit more than an intellectual imperative. Rome holds that they MUST ultimately adhere to Roman dogma.

Of course.  This is why it seems to me that they must either adhere to Roman dogma or become Orthodox.  Otherwise they are living with a rather significant contradiction.

Ultimately, yes. There was a time when I thought there was a third choice--Eastern Catholicism. I used to tell people that the pre-schism Church looked like the Eastern Catholic Church---Eastern in union with Rome. But that came crashing down on me over time. I learned that the Eastern Catholic Church used to be Orthodox. I learned that the post schism innovated doctrines of Rome were not known to the undivided Church. I learned that the fullness of truth existed in the Holy Orthodox Church.

Perhaps you are right about all of this...

[username!]

Ultimately, yes. There was a time when I thought there was a third choice--Eastern Catholicism. I used to tell people that the pre-schism Church looked like the Eastern Catholic Church---Eastern in union with Rome. But that came crashing down on me over time. I learned that the Eastern Catholic Church used to be Orthodox. I learned that the post schism innovated doctrines of Rome were not known to the undivided Church. I learned that the fullness of truth existed in the Holy Orthodox Church.

^post of the month nominee. 

[Peter J]

Ultimately, yes. There was a time when I thought there was a third choice--Eastern Catholicism.

Hi Mickey,

I was wondering if you might elaborate on this any further.

I quite understand the part where you're saying that Orthodoxy is what you choose. What I'm not quite clear on is when you say that Latin Catholicism is a real choice, albeit one you reject, but Eastern Catholicism isn't a choice at all. Is that what you're saying, and if so can you help to understand it better?

Happy Pasha!
-Peter.

[Mickey]

Hi Mickey,

I was wondering if you might elaborate on this any further.

I quite understand the part where you're saying that Orthodoxy is what you choose. What I'm not quite clear on is when you say that Latin Catholicism is a real choice, albeit one you reject, but Eastern Catholicism isn't a choice at all. Is that what you're saying, and if so can you help to understand it better?

I am saying that the schism is painful and it is a tragedy. I am saying that the Latin Church and the Holy Orthodox Church have Apostolic roots. I am saying that I believe the Latin Church has veered from the Apostolic Traditions through innovations. I am saying that I believed (at one time) that the Eastern Catholic Church was a wonderful melding of the Latin and Holy Orthodox Church--perhaps mimicking the pre-schism ancient Church. I am saying that I now believe that the Eastern Catholic Church is simply subject, submissive and obedient to the Latin Church. I am saying that the true patrimony of the Eastern Catholic Church is...well...the Holy Orthodox Church! I am saying that I believe the Holy Orthodox Church is the Church of antiquity---the Church that Jesus Christ established at Pentacost--the 2000 year old Church of our Fathers.

Is that more clear, Peter?

[Ung-Certez]

I am saying that the schism is painful and it is a tragedy. I am saying that the Latin Church and the Holy Orthodox Church have Apostolic roots. I am saying that I believe the Latin Church has veered from the Apostolic Traditions through innovations. I am saying that I believed (at one time) that the Eastern Catholic Church was a wonderful melding of the Latin and Holy Orthodox Church--perhaps mimicking the pre-schism ancient Church. I am saying that I now believe that the Eastern Catholic Church is simply subject, submissive and obedient to the Latin Church. I am saying that the the true patrimony of the Eastern Catholic Church is...well...the Holy Orthodox Church! I am saying that I believe the Holy Orthodox Church is the Church of antiquity---the Church that Jesus Christ established at Pentacost--the 2000 year old Church of our Fathers.

Is that more clear, Peter?

Mickey,

...well put!  As an Eastern Catholic, I concur 100%!

Christos Voskrese!  Voistinnu Voskrese!

Ung-Certez

[Mickey]

Mickey,

...well put!  As an Eastern Catholic, I concur 100%!

Christos Voskrese!  Voistinnu Voskrese!

Ung-Certez

Christos Voskrese!  Voistinnu Voskrese!

God bless you my friend!

[Peter J]

Is that more clear, Peter?

Not entirely. Are you 'saying' that you consider Latin Catholicism an option, but you don't consider Eastern Catholicism an option? Or are you 'saying' that you used to consider Latin Catholicism and Eastern Catholicism as two different options, but now see them as the same option (so that by rejecting the one you automatically reject the other)?

[Peter J]

Mickey,

...well put!  As an Eastern Catholic, I concur 100%!

Christos Voskrese!  Voistinnu Voskrese!

Ung-Certez

Now now Ung-Certez, it's not nice to try to confuse me.

[Mickey]

Not entirely. Are you 'saying' that you consider Latin Catholicism an option, but you don't consider Eastern Catholicism an option?

I am saying that the Eastern Catholic Church is a subset of the Latin Church and must adhere to all dogmas thereof.

[Peter J]

I am saying that the Eastern Catholic Church is a subset of the Latin Church and must adhere to all dogmas thereof.

No offense intended, but doesn't it seem slightly presumptuous of you to tell ECs what they must adhere to in order to be ECs?

[Ung-Certez]

No offense intended, but doesn't it seem slightly presumptuous of you to tell ECs what they must adhere to in order to be ECs?

Ah, hello?  Every educated RC claims the same statement, that we must accept every RC dogma in order to exist within the Catholic Church.    I, personally don't believe this, but this is what is assumed by RC's when the subject of what do Eastern Catholics have to believe (dogmas) in to be truly Catholic comes up. I don't
remember reading any such statements for any of the Particular Eastern Churches that reunited with Rome.  Show me documents where it has been spelled out?

Christos Anesti!  Alithos Anesti!

U-C

[Peter J]

But Mickey said "must adhere to", not "the pope says they must adhere to".

Perhaps the question I should be asking Mickey is whether, in his mind, the pope saying something necessarily means that it's true? (If so, I think he should consider becoming Catholic. )

-Peter.

[Peter J]

(If so, I think he should consider becoming Catholic. )

I mean ... again.

[Mickey]

No offense intended, but doesn't it seem slightly presumptuous of you to tell ECs what they must adhere to in order to be ECs?

I am not here to play word games Peter. And I am not interested in being in communion with Rome as I'm sure you are not interested in being in communion with Holy Orthodoxy (unless of course the schism is suddenly healed). 

As an Eastern Catholic, I experienced a strange dichotomy. I was often told that we are in communion with Rome, but we have our own unique "Orthodox" understanding of certain teachings and doctrines. I was told that Eastern Catholics are "Orthodox in communion with Rome". I came to understand this to be a fallacy.

The Latin Church teaches that the Pope of Rome is the supreme pontiff and is infallible when teaching ex-cathedra. This leaves no room for alternate understandings in a Church (Eastern Catholic) who is submissive to Rome. It is very cut and dry. Since I am in disagreement with much of what Rome teaches,(Filioque, purgatory, IC, Infallibility, original sin, etc), I find it impossible to be in communion with Rome--whether Latin or any of the 23 sui juris Eastern Catholic Churches.

[ozgeorge]

Your posts have got me thinking Mickey.
I wonder if some become Eastern Catholic believing that they will be fully accepted by both Roman Catholics and Orthodox, whereas the reality is that neither fully accepts them?

[Ung-Certez]

Your posts have got me thinking Mickey.
I wonder if some become Eastern Catholic believing that they will be fully accepted by both Roman Catholics and Orthodox, whereas the reality is that neither fully accepts them?

...yes, we are like orphans living with our foster parents until the time we are reunited with our "biological" ecclesiastical parents!

Christos Voskres! Voistynu Voskres!

Ung

[ozgeorge]

...yes, we are like orphans living with our foster parents until the time we are reunited with our "biological" ecclesiastical parents!

That must feel terrible. I'm ashamed to admit that I've never thought of this before now.

[Peter J]

...yes, we are like orphans living with our foster parents until the time we are reunited with our "biological" ecclesiastical parents!

Christos Voskres! Voistynu Voskres!

Ung

I like that analogy.

[Peter J]

I am not here to play word games Peter.

Well that's a relief.

I was told that Eastern Catholics are "Orthodox in communion with Rome". I came to understand this to be a fallacy.

I myself have come to dislike the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" rhetoric -- or at least, much of the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" rhetoric. I think it's often used as a way to, putting it in the most polite terms, avoid listening to the Orthodox p.o.v.

Since I am in disagreement with much of what Rome teaches,(Filioque, purgatory, IC, Infallibility, original sin, etc), I find it impossible to be in communion with Rome--whether Latin or any of the 23 sui juris Eastern Catholic Churches.

If I believed the pope to be in heresy, then I certainly would not want to be in full communion with him. (Of course, I also wouldn't consider him to be pope.) But I sympathize with ECs who don't agree with him on everything, but also don't consider him to be in heresy. After all, weren't there Patriarchs of Constantinople in the first millennium who remained in full communion with the pope but didn't agree with everything he said?

Blessings,
Peter.

[lubeltri]

...yes, we are like orphans living with our foster parents until the time we are reunited with our "biological" ecclesiastical parents!

(extending the analogy) Well, I'm glad we took you in when your biological parents left you. 

And I admit that it has been only recently that we've begun to allow you to sit at the big dinner table. May this trend continue!

[ozgeorge]

After all, weren't there Patriarchs of Constantinople in the first millennium who remained in full communion with the pope but didn't agree with everything he said?

But they never claimed infallibility.

[Mickey]

Your posts have got me thinking Mickey.
I wonder if some become Eastern Catholic believing that they will be fully accepted by both Roman Catholics and Orthodox, whereas the reality is that neither fully accepts them?

Exactly! There was a time that I felt that I was part of the bridge that would heal the schism. Little did I know that the Eastern Catholics helped to widen the gap! 

[Ung-Certez]

(extending the analogy) Well, I'm glad we took you in when your biological parents left you. 

...we were orphaned during the time of the Great Spiritual and Theological Divorce 1054-till the present, and were taken by CYS and handed over to our foster parents until we can be reunited with our "Eccesiastical " parents when this settlement/reconcilliation is finished!

Christos Anesti!  Alithos Anesti!

Ung

[Mickey]

After all, weren't there Patriarchs of Constantinople in the first millennium who remained in full communion with the pope but didn't agree with everything he said?

Can you disagree with post schism Latin Catholic doctrine and remain in communion with Rome today?