OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 20, 2014, 07:13:57 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Question for Byzantine Catholics?  (Read 9157 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« on: March 08, 2012, 02:21:33 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2012, 04:13:13 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church. 

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!
« Last Edit: March 08, 2012, 04:18:34 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2012, 04:55:10 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church.  

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!
Very interesting. In the past when I adopted certain Byzantine spiritual practices, I was discouraged by some from the East, because they thought it was bad to mix the two. However, you seem to be as comfortable with the mixing as I was. I'm quite the Thomist, but I love praying the Jesus Prayer, praying before icons, Byzantine Liturgy, etc. On the other hand, I love the Rosary, the TLM, stations of the Cross, Eucharistic Adoration, etc. And I don't feel schizophrenic either.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2012, 04:58:00 PM by Papist » Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2012, 05:00:04 PM »

 I wonder if EC's say the filioque...
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 08, 2012, 05:01:26 PM »

I wonder if EC's say the filioque...

Ruthenians are not supposed to since the RDL.  They were, I believe, the last holdouts to continue to recite the filioque, at least in the United States.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2012, 05:03:57 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church. 

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!

what made you leave the EOC?
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2012, 05:04:32 PM »

I wonder if EC's say the filioque...

Ruthenians are not supposed to since the RDL.  They were, I believe, the last holdouts to continue to recite the filioque, at least in the United States.

oh ok, thanks. what's RDL?
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2012, 05:17:02 PM »

I wonder if EC's say the filioque...

Ruthenians are not supposed to since the RDL.  They were, I believe, the last holdouts to continue to recite the filioque, at least in the United States.

Maronite Catholics do. (I don't know whether or not any other EC churches do.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #8 on: March 08, 2012, 05:18:05 PM »

I wonder if EC's say the filioque...

Ruthenians are not supposed to since the RDL.  They were, I believe, the last holdouts to continue to recite the filioque, at least in the United States.

Maronite Catholics do. (I don't know whether or not any other EC churches do.)
Hmmm, I don't remember that the last time I attended Maronite Liturgy.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #9 on: March 08, 2012, 05:20:10 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church. 

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!

what made you leave the EOC?

Long story, not for "public consumption".  At least not here, anyway.  
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #10 on: March 08, 2012, 05:21:13 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

This was posted on the Catholic Answers Forum, but it seems relevant to your question:

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #11 on: March 08, 2012, 05:23:33 PM »

I wonder if EC's say the filioque...

Ruthenians are not supposed to since the RDL.  They were, I believe, the last holdouts to continue to recite the filioque, at least in the United States.

oh ok, thanks. what's RDL?

The Divine Liturgy as celebrated in the Ruthenian rite underwent some changes a few years ago, hence RDL, i.e. Revised Divine Liturgy.  I think. 
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #12 on: March 08, 2012, 05:23:51 PM »

I wonder if EC's say the filioque...

Ruthenians are not supposed to since the RDL.  They were, I believe, the last holdouts to continue to recite the filioque, at least in the United States.

oh ok, thanks. what's RDL?

Revised Divine Liturgy promulgated in 2007 for the Byzantine Catholic Metropolia of Pittsburgh.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #13 on: March 08, 2012, 05:25:01 PM »

I wonder if EC's say the filioque...

Ruthenians are not supposed to since the RDL.  They were, I believe, the last holdouts to continue to recite the filioque, at least in the United States.

Maronite Catholics do. (I don't know whether or not any other EC churches do.)
Hmmm, I don't remember that the last time I attended Maronite Liturgy.

It's certainly possible that it varies from parish to parish. I was just speaking from personal experience.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2012, 05:27:32 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

This was posted on the Catholic Answers Forum, but it seems relevant to your question:

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.


I would agree with that.  Most of the time  Grin.  From what I've read of mardukm's posts, I find much there that I agree with.  And many Orthodox, well..Netodox anyway, don't.  Oh well....
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #15 on: March 08, 2012, 05:28:09 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

This was posted on the Catholic Answers Forum, but it seems relevant to your question:

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.

Mardukm has always had an interesting perspective on the matter. I am probably a bit more "hardline" than he is, but his viewpoint seems common among many Catholics in general.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #16 on: March 08, 2012, 05:40:48 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church.  

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!
Very interesting. In the past when I adopted certain Byzantine spiritual practices, I was discouraged by some from the East, because they thought it was bad to mix the two. However, you seem to be as comfortable with the mixing as I was. I'm quite the Thomist, but I love praying the Jesus Prayer, praying before icons, Byzantine Liturgy, etc. On the other hand, I love the Rosary, the TLM, stations of the Cross, Eucharistic Adoration, etc. And I don't feel schizophrenic either.

The only thing you mention above that I haven't experienced is the TLM.  That's for logistical reasons more than any thing else.  I'd love to do so, and one day, I'm sure, will.

As for the other practices, I see no reason whatsoever why *any* Catholic should not, if so moved,  do any or all of them. 
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #17 on: March 08, 2012, 06:17:40 PM »

First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
I believe we are all part of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church.

Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
I don't know that my experience of the faith is different.  My experience of Church politics I am sure is.

Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
I believe man is born with out the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  I believe Mary was born with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  I believe theosis continues after death and that prayer for the dead is effacious.  I believe the bread and wine are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.  I believe the Pope of Rome has the right of intervention in a crisis universally.  I do not believe the Pope has the universal right of micromanagement or interference in local Churches.  I believe the Pope can speak infallibly for the Church.

I believe Catholics and Orthodox that dogmatize their medieval accretions are in error.
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Yes.

Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?
Growing up, while formally RC, I had a foot in both the BC and RC due to family. I have been exclusively BC since I was 15.  I fell closer to Christ through the Byzantine tradition than the Roman, but I recognize that is not true for all.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #18 on: March 08, 2012, 06:26:42 PM »

First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
I believe we are all part of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church.

Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
I don't know that my experience of the faith is different.  My experience of Church politics I am sure is.

Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
I believe man is born with out the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  I believe Mary was born with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  I believe theosis continues after death and that prayer for the dead is effacious.  I believe the bread and wine are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.  I believe the Pope of Rome has the right of intervention in a crisis universally.  I do not believe the Pope has the universal right of micromanagement or interference in local Churches.  I believe the Pope can speak infallibly for the Church.

I believe Catholics and Orthodox that dogmatize their medieval accretions are in error.
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Yes.

Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?
Growing up, while formally RC, I had a foot in both the BC and RC due to family. I have been exclusively BC since I was 15.  I fell closer to Christ through the Byzantine tradition than the Roman, but I recognize that is not true for all.

Well said!

Did you canonically change Rites from RC to BC?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #19 on: March 08, 2012, 06:46:41 PM »

Did you canonically change Rites from RC to BC?

Yes, when I was 26.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 08, 2012, 07:05:21 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?
« Last Edit: March 08, 2012, 07:05:50 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #21 on: March 08, 2012, 07:08:47 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church. 

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!

what made you leave the EOC?
Closed communion?
I was baptized into the wonderful Holy Byzantine Catholic Church.  At the same time I was also chrismated, and received Holy Communion.  Sometime later my wife (baptized Byz.Cath, raised RC) and I were received into Orthodoxy (OCA) via chrismation.  Now, I know this may cause some here to become apoplectic Grin, but since our chrismation we have have mainly worshipped and communed in the O.C., but there have been times when (shock, horror, gasp!!!!) we have received communion in the Catholic Church, confessed to and been absolved by Catholic priests.  (Wow---now he's goin' straight to hell in a hand basket!  Roll Eyes)

Why do I say all this?  Because I believe in ONE God, in ONE Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church..., in ONE baptism..., etc.  And I believe that that ONE Church is manifested (if that's the right word) in both Orthodoxy AND Catholicism.  And I believe that that makes the apostolicity of both, the validity of the sacraments of both EQUAL.  God is really present in the Eucharist of both.  How could He NOT be?  Can anyone *prove* beyond any reasonable doubt that He is not?  I know, I know....someone out there's going to start throwing theology at me after recovering their eyebrows from the ceiling, but it all boils down to this, as I've asked elsewhere on this forum.....when we come before God at the Final Judgment, will He ask if we were Catholic (yes, and if so, which type?), Orthodox (yes, and if so, which jurisdiction?), Baptist, or Jew, or whatever??  Well....will He?  Or will He ask if we have loved Him, if we have loved our neighbor and our enemy;  if we have fed the hungry, clothed the naked, etc.?  Will He ask if we choose Him or if we choose the other?  I mean, really.....come on folks....I know it's fun and interesting and edifying to argue, discuss, and debate these matters, but are they that which is **really** essential to us as God's children, who, hopefully, love Him above all else?

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #22 on: March 08, 2012, 07:10:14 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs?

Not I.

Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

LARPing sounds like fun, but I don't really have much time for it.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #23 on: March 08, 2012, 07:26:21 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

So because my Greek Catholic ancestors were on my mother's side and not my father's I am LARPing?
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Tony
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 201


« Reply #24 on: March 08, 2012, 08:08:21 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

So because my Greek Catholic ancestors were on my mother's side and not my father's I am LARPing?

What does LARPing mean?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #25 on: March 08, 2012, 08:29:26 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

So because my Greek Catholic ancestors were on my mother's side and not my father's I am LARPing?

Quote

Code of Canon Law Can. 111 §1. Through the reception of baptism, the child of parents who belong to the Latin Church is enrolled in it, or, if one or the other does not belong to it, both parents have chosen by mutual agreement to have the offspring baptized in the Latin Church. If there is no mutual agreement, however, the child is enrolled in the ritual Church to which the father belongs.

Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium Canon 29

1. By virtue of baptism, a child who has not yet completed his fourteenth year of age is enrolled in the Church sui iuris of the Catholic father; or the Church sui iuris of the mother if only the mother is Catholic or if both parents by agreement freely request it, with due regard for particular law established by the Apostolic See. 2. If the child who has not yet completed his fourteenth year is: (1) born of an unwed mother, he is enrolled in the Church sui iuris to which the mother belongs; (2) born of unknown parents, he is to be enrolled in the Church sui iuris of those in whose care he has been legitimately committed are enrolled; if it is a case of an adoptive father and mother, 1 should be applied; (3) born of non-baptized parents, the child is to be a member of the Church sui iuris of the one who is responsible for his education in the Catholic faith.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_PC.HTM#RT
http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG1199/_PT.HTM

Only you can tell, deacon.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #26 on: March 08, 2012, 09:55:32 PM »

What does LARPing mean?

LARP = Latin to Another Rite Person
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #27 on: March 08, 2012, 09:56:45 PM »

What does LARPing mean?

LARP = Latin to Another Rite Person

LOL  Roll Eyes  Grin
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #28 on: March 08, 2012, 10:14:12 PM »

Only you can tell, deacon.

I can tell and I am familiar with the canons Isa.  As a child I had no say in the matter, when my family moved to a town with a Byzantine Catholic parish when I was 15, I did.  I think it unfair and disrespectful to label me a LARPer because I could not control the parish of my childhood.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #29 on: March 08, 2012, 10:15:19 PM »

What does LARPing mean?

Live Action Role Playing
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,065


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #30 on: March 08, 2012, 10:28:04 PM »

Something else I've also wondered that many Eastern Catholics seem to keep post-schism saints as part of their own tradition, even if they may have had an anti-Rome understanding.

It's interesting to see for instance MardukM keep people like St. Jacob of Serugh and St. Severus of Antioch as respect church fathers of Coptic Catholics, despite their anti-Chalcedonian stand.

However, what do Eastern Catholics think about keeping things like the Immaculate Conception or Ecclesiology theologomenoun?  Is it necessary to the Catholic faith to have Rome as the infallible head of all churches and the Theotokos as born in a manner similar (although not the same, as I understand it from Marduk) to post-baptism for many Christians?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #31 on: March 08, 2012, 11:20:28 PM »

The Ruthenians recited the Filioque when I was with them for a brief period before moving away from Oregon back in 2009. The priest seemed ashamed of it, though, when I asked him about it afterwards (as I had expected them not to say it, and was confused to find that I, a Latin visitor, was the only one who didn't). Take that as you will. There is probably wide variation.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #32 on: March 08, 2012, 11:51:15 PM »

Something else I've also wondered that many Eastern Catholics seem to keep post-schism saints as part of their own tradition, even if they may have had an anti-Rome understanding.

It's interesting to see for instance MardukM keep people like St. Jacob of Serugh and St. Severus of Antioch as respect church fathers of Coptic Catholics, despite their anti-Chalcedonian stand.

However, what do Eastern Catholics think about keeping things like the Immaculate Conception or Ecclesiology theologomenoun?  Is it necessary to the Catholic faith to have Rome as the infallible head of all churches and the Theotokos as born in a manner similar (although not the same, as I understand it from Marduk) to post-baptism for many Christians?

This may or may not be helpful, but the post from the Catholic Answers Forum that I quoted earlier:

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.

was elaborated on later in the same thread:

Quote from: mardukm
Quote
Indeed, those anti-Catholics ideas that the pope isn't head of the whole church, or that Mary wasn't immaculately conceived etc., aren't the real Orthodox teachings.
Those are not examples of polemics or anti-Catholic ideas. Those are simply their beliefs.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #33 on: March 08, 2012, 11:56:09 PM »

This was posted on the Catholic Answers Forum, but it seems relevant to your question:

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.

Mardukm has always had an interesting perspective on the matter. I am probably a bit more "hardline" than he is, but his viewpoint seems common among many Catholics in general.

I think it goes without saying, but I'll say it anyhow, that Catholic Answers isn't necessarily representative of Catholicism.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2012, 11:59:56 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #34 on: March 09, 2012, 02:01:06 AM »

Only you can tell, deacon.

I can tell and I am familiar with the canons Isa.  As a child I had no say in the matter, when my family moved to a town with a Byzantine Catholic parish when I was 15, I did.  I think it unfair and disrespectful to label me a LARPer because I could not control the parish of my childhood.
You mean me, Deacon?  I haven't labeled anyone a LARPer.  You asked a question that, AFAIK, only you knew the facts to answer the question according to your church's canons.  I don't get those canons myself: my one son was baptized in an OCA parish to which I belonged by the hand of an Antiochian priest, and my other was baptized by the hand of another Antiochian priest in my Antiochian parish to which I belong now but did not then.  In Vatican speak I guess it would be (given the canons governing where who would end up if they submitted to the Vatican) it would be as if the first was baptized in a Ruthenian (the corresponding sui juris to the OCA?) parish to which I belonged by the hand of a Melkite priest, and the other was baptized by the hand of another Melkite priest in a Melkite parish I did not belong to.   But besides pro forma permission for the Antiochian priest to serve at the OCA Cathedral, and the notice to the OCA Cathedral that I was transferring to the Antiochian parish, there was none of this canonical transfer enrollment stuff.  Their mother went from the Romanian Church to the OCA to the Antiochian Archdiocese no problem (her problems only started when she tried to go from the Antiochian to the Romanian to evade ecclesiastical sanction), the hardest part being proof of her baptism in Romania, and the priest took my word on it from evidence I had been presented in Romania.  It would seem our Churches are not as disunited as is made out, and the Vatican's is not as stitched together as claimed.

LARPing I would restrict to those who act Arabized but are not Arab, act Russified but are not Russian, act Hellenized but are not Greek, etc.  Because if one is Arabized, Russified, Hellenized etc. he is Arab, Russian, Greek etc.  Given the way the Vatican has set up its sui juris scheme, I don't think those who are enrolled in a "sui juris" would be LARPing.  Except for this


So Irish Melkite and Apotheum, for instance, would not be LARPers, much less someone of the "sui juris" ethnicity.  If you misunderstood, I apologize.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #35 on: March 09, 2012, 11:21:19 AM »

Only you can tell, deacon.

I can tell and I am familiar with the canons Isa.  As a child I had no say in the matter, when my family moved to a town with a Byzantine Catholic parish when I was 15, I did.  I think it unfair and disrespectful to label me a LARPer because I could not control the parish of my childhood.

Two questions for you, Deacon:
1.  Did you transfer to the Byzantine Rite because of your calling to the diaconate?

2.  Is there some kind of negative connotation associated with transferring rites?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #36 on: March 09, 2012, 11:28:26 AM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

Wow, really?

I suppose any Orthodox convert is just "LARPing".

Seriously, Michal, the way you asked that question isn't cool.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,009


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 09, 2012, 11:32:48 AM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

Sigh.  Embarrassed Cry
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #38 on: March 09, 2012, 11:38:53 AM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

Sigh.  Embarrassed Cry

 +1

But....to give him the benefit of the doubt....if English isn't his first language (and I don't know whether it is or isn't), maybe it just came out that way because of translation issues.  Or something.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #39 on: March 09, 2012, 11:45:57 AM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc. is just LARPing???
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #40 on: March 09, 2012, 11:53:05 AM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc. is just LARPing???

I certainly see absolutely nothing wrong with it--and may God bless you for it!  But, perhaps in the mind of someone who either doesn't understand Catholicism or who has little or no respect for Catholicism (or both), that might be seen in some kind of negative light.  More's the pity.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #41 on: March 09, 2012, 11:54:32 AM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc. is just LARPing???

I certainly see absolutely nothing wrong with it--and may God bless you for it!  But, perhaps in the mind of someone who either doesn't understand Catholicism or who has little or no respect for Catholicism (or both), that might be seen in some kind of negative light.  More's the pity.


Well I appreciate your perspective. I'm going to evening prayer, as well as the Liturgy of the Presanctified tonight. I've been looking forward to it all week.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #42 on: March 09, 2012, 12:13:47 PM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc. is just LARPing???

I certainly see absolutely nothing wrong with it--and may God bless you for it!  But, perhaps in the mind of someone who either doesn't understand Catholicism or who has little or no respect for Catholicism (or both), that might be seen in some kind of negative light.  More's the pity.




Well I appreciate your perspective. I'm going to evening prayer, as well as the Liturgy of the Presanctified tonight. I've been looking forward to it all week.

It'd be great if all Catholics were able to experience both Eastern and Western Catholicism in order to really appreciate the depth, fullness, and breadth of the Catholic Church.  Good for you!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #43 on: March 09, 2012, 12:16:45 PM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc.

That describes me for the last 9 years. (Unless you mean Byzantine Parish as specifically BCA. I've only been to Melkite and Ukrainian parishes.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #44 on: March 09, 2012, 12:51:32 PM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc.

That describes me for the last 9 years. (Unless you mean Byzantine Parish as specifically BCA. I've only been to Melkite and Ukrainian parishes.)
I just meant all Catholic Churches that use the Byzantine Rite.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #45 on: March 09, 2012, 12:56:17 PM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc.

That describes me for the last 9 years. (Unless you mean Byzantine Parish as specifically BCA. I've only been to Melkite and Ukrainian parishes.)
I just meant all Catholic Churches that use the Byzantine Rite.

In that case, disregard my parenthetical remark.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,850



« Reply #46 on: March 09, 2012, 01:16:26 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #47 on: March 09, 2012, 01:33:02 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?

If I understood your question correctly (and I'm not sure that I did), I'd just say that the vast majority of Western Catholics that I know of do not pray before icons when praying privately, whereas many, if not most, Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics do.  (Interesting to note that a number of Orthodox I know *only* come into the presence of icons at church.)  So, yes, one could fairly accurately say that praying before icons is more common (but by no means exclusive) to Eastern traditions than to Western.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #48 on: March 09, 2012, 02:38:21 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #49 on: March 09, 2012, 02:39:32 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek!!!!!  Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked


 angel
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #50 on: March 09, 2012, 02:47:04 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin

OK, that was weird.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #51 on: March 09, 2012, 03:01:02 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin
Your statues can pray?
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #52 on: March 09, 2012, 03:11:22 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin
Your statues can pray?
Ha! No, I was saying that we pray in front of statues, much like EOs pray in front of icons.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #53 on: March 09, 2012, 03:12:02 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin
OK, that was weird.
Well, I was just being goofy, but I guess this didn't land well. My bad.  Cheesy
« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 03:12:22 PM by Papist » Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #54 on: March 09, 2012, 03:24:20 PM »

My guess is born Greek Catholics like born Orthodox tend not to hang out on the Internet talking about church.

You've got the majority of GCs, cradles/ethnics, who essentially are like modern Roman Riters but with a better liturgy. You've got a minority of folk, usually converts/born Roman Riters, who do what Rome wants GCs to do, be Orthodox in practice while upholding all Catholic doctrine. Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason. More like Protestants who happen to agree with the Orthodox than good Orthodox or good Catholics.

I like Deacon Lance's profession of faith: fits the second category.

The two insights/takeaways I get from 20 years of being around this tradition are the appeal of a local, ethnic/family-based (ethnicity/church as big family, but small parish like a family) grassroots traditionalism (which includes Deacon Lance's 'papal minimalism': the authority of custom, not micromanagement from the top), which you can find a form of among GCs (it's like the '50s but that seems more natural there, because it never went away, than at a Roman Rite traditionalist chapel, a conscious re-enactment; ethnic OCA and ACROD parishes are a lot like that), and Leonid Ouspensky's view of icons as something like a sacramental presence.

Re: some Orthodox only seeing icons in church, of course. Not everybody is churchy.

Many here know my line: rite controls what you do in church. Devotion at home is freestyle: pray any way you like and venerate anybody you want.

I wouldn't call a born Roman Riter going to a GC church and/or doing Byzantine Rite practices at home a LARPer if he's not a theological liberal.
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #55 on: March 09, 2012, 03:27:13 PM »

Good to see you on the forum still, young fogey.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #56 on: March 09, 2012, 03:47:05 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin
Your statues can pray?

Grin

I'm reminded of my bible study group, about a decade ago. We were discussing "All who came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them." (at least that was the verse) and someone suggested that Jesus really meant "those before me" i.e. the pharisees who were physically standing before him.

But I digress.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 03:47:49 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #57 on: March 09, 2012, 04:12:45 PM »

^like
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #58 on: March 09, 2012, 04:55:28 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #59 on: March 09, 2012, 04:58:24 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.

It's safe to conclude that he is a BSer and ignore his incoherent opinions.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #60 on: March 09, 2012, 05:00:50 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church.  

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!
Very interesting. In the past when I adopted certain Byzantine spiritual practices, I was discouraged by some from the East, because they thought it was bad to mix the two.

In the past, mixing practices took the form of imposing Latin practices on ECs.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #61 on: March 09, 2012, 05:08:17 PM »

Most of the time the GCs disobeyed Rome by latinizing themselves.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #62 on: March 09, 2012, 05:33:13 PM »

Most of the time the GCs disobeyed Rome by latinizing themselves.

Okay, I admit I'm intrigued. Also puzzled.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #63 on: March 09, 2012, 05:33:34 PM »

So a Latin who attends a Byzantine Parish, understrands Catholic in an Eastern manner, participates in the liturgica life of the Byzantine Parish, etc. is just LARPing???

Huh? Eastern manner?  I wish the Orthodox parishes there returned to Orthodoxy from Greek Catholicism would just shed most of their Greek catholic practices.  It's so ingrained that people don't even realize it.  Most of the time people left because of rome's dictates, ie, celibacy, calender and property issues.  It's been for most an 80 year adventure but yet there are still a few things that need to be done away with.  So what you call eastern mindset in a GC parish is what we would call a western influence in our parishes (that were former GC).
Logged

username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #64 on: March 09, 2012, 05:35:53 PM »

Most of the time the GCs disobeyed Rome by latinizing themselves.

Like the current Ruthenian liturgy.  The powers that be just hobbled it together and Rome didn't ask them to do it.  Instead of "God who loves mankind" it's "God who loves us all" and for us men and for... in their creed is "for us and our salvation" among a bunch of other late 1960's-1970's kumbya words.  Blame Uniontown partially on this. 
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #65 on: March 09, 2012, 05:56:17 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.

It's safe to conclude that he is a BSer and ignore his incoherent opinions.

Who are you referring to?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #66 on: March 09, 2012, 05:59:47 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.

It's safe to conclude that he is a BSer and ignore his incoherent opinions.

Who are you referring to?

Anyone calling himself "Orthodox in communion with Rome."
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #67 on: March 09, 2012, 06:01:27 PM »

I have a few questions for the Byzantine Catholics on this forum. This is not a loyalty test. I am not interested in that stuff right now. I'm just trying to understand Byzantine Catholicism better. Probably because, while I am very Thomistic Latin, I absolutely love attending Byzantine Liturgy, and during Lent I ususally attend verspers and the Liturgy of the Presanctified on Friday evenings. Something about that Byzantine parish has always had quite a draw for me. Thus, I want to know more about how Byzantine Catholics understand the faith, and because this is an Orthodox forum, I would like to know more about how the Byzantine Catholics on this forum relate to Eastern Orthodox Christians.
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Fifth, if you are a Byzantine Catholic who was once a Roman Catholic, what has changed about the experience of your faith since you have switched to an Eastern Church?

Hmm....Interesting questions...

Let me start by saying that my experience may be somewhat different from the usual ByzCath in that I came to Christianity from a secular Jewish background relatively late in life (about age 49) and hence whatever baggage I brought with me will be of an entirely different order than that of someone raised in a Christian church, more specifically either the Byzantine or Roman Catholic Church.  

My experience may also be somewhat different in that while I was baptized, etc. into the ByzCath Church and remain canonically Byzantine, I've spent more years worshiping in and being a member of a Roman Catholic parish than a Byzantine one.  I also spent several years in the Orthodox Church and then returned to Catholicism.

Now to your questions....

1.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by ecclesial position, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  I am a member of the Body of Christ.  I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  My *opinion*, for which I've taken some heat on this board,  is that the Orthodox Church is also a part of that same One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and I feel that our separation, the schism, is sinful and the perpetuation of it equally so.  Sometimes I feel more strongly about this, sometimes less so.  And sometimes I think I may be gradually coming to think of us as "irreconcilable" and that saddens me enormously.  But then I remember that with God, all things are possible!  As for Roman Catholics, that's easy!  They are my brothers and sisters in Christ and we are part and parcel of the same Church.  I feel equally at home in a Roman Catholic church as I do in a Byzantine--sometimes even more so.  Unlike some ByzCaths, because of my background and lack of attachments and prejudices about a particular "version" of Catholicism, I don't particularly lament the so-called "Latinizations" that have occurred.  Sorry to be so verbose!  And vague.

2.  I don't know if a life-long ByzCath would be able to answer that.  In fact, I would venture to guess that *any* Catholic you would ask might have a slightly different answer than any other Catholic, of whatever persuasion.  Maybe I'm just not certain either what you mean by "your experience of the Catholic faith", or how I would express an answer that would make sense.  Sorry... Sad.

3.  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes--though I won't pretend that I understand all of those as deeply or thoroughly as others, or as deeply as I would wish to.  I am aware, however, that there may be some Byzantine Catholics who might hedge their bets about some of those, or would, perhaps use slightly different language to express the same things.

4.  My *faith* is Catholic--in almost all ways very close to Orthodoxy (I know some of my Orthodox brothers and sisters will take issue with that, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it  Grin!)  My public praxis, given that my wife and I worship in a Roman Catholic parish, is Roman Catholic.  My private praxis is a mixture of East and West, and I have no problem with that at all.  (And no, I'm *not* schizophrenic  Wink Wink!)

Hope that helps some.

I'm very interested to read replies from other Byzantine Catholics here!
Very interesting. In the past when I adopted certain Byzantine spiritual practices, I was discouraged by some from the East, because they thought it was bad to mix the two.

In the past, mixing practices took the form of imposing Latin practices on ECs.

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #68 on: March 09, 2012, 06:05:38 PM »

You mean me, Deacon? ... If you misunderstood, I apologize.

I was refering to Michal, but thank you.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #69 on: March 09, 2012, 06:06:43 PM »

Examples of latinizations that used to occur, maybe do in one or places still in Greek Catholic parishes (byzantine catholics as well)
first communion at age 5/6
stations of the cross during lent
eucharistic adoration (haven't seen this since 2005)
mandated celibacy for priests (still pretty much the standard)
use of Latin pascha date (which still occurs all over North America)
use of paten during communion (still occurs)
people kneeling to receive (still occurs)
one hour fast before communion (still occurs)
no use of hot water during preparation of the chalice (zeon)  still occurs
pre-cut bread for proskomedia still occurs
laity distributing communion
use of paraliturgical hymns before liturgy and after presanctified
I can on if you'd like
Logged

username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #70 on: March 09, 2012, 06:08:23 PM »

Only you can tell, deacon.


So Irish Melkite and Apotheum, for instance, would not be LARPers, much less someone of the "sui juris" ethnicity.  If you misunderstood, I apologize.

The whole subject of LARper is new to me and I have had a nightmare or two about it.  Don't ever use the word "LARper in the same sentence as Irish Melkite please.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2012, 06:09:27 PM by username! » Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #71 on: March 09, 2012, 06:09:15 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.

It's safe to conclude that he is a BSer and ignore his incoherent opinions.

Who are you referring to?

Anyone calling himself "Orthodox in communion with Rome."

Okay.  Everyone's entitled to an opinion.  Incoherent or otherwise.  Sometimes, though, people whose opinions we think are incoherent, or stupid, or crazy, or whatever just *may* be on to something correct or accurate or valuable, and our own opinions (prejudices?) get in the way of allowing us to recognize that.  Oh well...
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #72 on: March 09, 2012, 06:17:07 PM »

Most of the time the GCs disobeyed Rome by latinizing themselves.

Like the current Ruthenian liturgy.  The powers that be just hobbled it together and Rome didn't ask them to do it.  Instead of "God who loves mankind" it's "God who loves us all" and for us men and for... in their creed is "for us and our salvation"

How are those latinizations?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #73 on: March 09, 2012, 06:18:25 PM »

Most of the time the GCs disobeyed Rome by latinizing themselves.

Like the current Ruthenian liturgy.  The powers that be just hobbled it together and Rome didn't ask them to do it.  Instead of "God who loves mankind" it's "God who loves us all" and for us men and for... in their creed is "for us and our salvation" among a bunch of other late 1960's-1970's kumbya words.  Blame Uniontown partially on this. 

Would you call these changes "Ruthenianizations", "bastardizations", or something else  Wink?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #74 on: March 09, 2012, 06:18:49 PM »

Most of the time the GCs disobeyed Rome by latinizing themselves.

Like the current Ruthenian liturgy.  The powers that be just hobbled it together and Rome didn't ask them to do it.  Instead of "God who loves mankind" it's "God who loves us all" and for us men and for... in their creed is "for us and our salvation"

How are those latinizations?

See my post above.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #75 on: March 09, 2012, 06:19:20 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #76 on: March 09, 2012, 06:22:57 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

And some of the at least offensive latin actions I have seen are from the bi-ritual latin priests.  I knew one parish where the bi-ritual priest would invite his buddies to celebrate, he removed icons and replaced them "to match each other" (whereas the ones that were there were donations over 100 years from parishoners) he removed slavonic totally, when the new liturgy came out I know a good bit of the parish went down the street to ACROD.
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #77 on: March 09, 2012, 06:24:26 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #78 on: March 09, 2012, 06:26:42 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?

It's a generalization.  There are specific events and times perhaps that latin-trends came into usage and I'm sure each one has a different story.  The terribly translated recent Ruthenian divine liturgy is an example where Rome didn't tell the bishops in the USA to do it, they just did it but Rome did approve it. 
I have seen former RC converts who are orthodox priests invent their own "junk" into liturgy and then have the parish pick it up as practice. 
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #79 on: March 09, 2012, 06:29:33 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?

It's a generalization.  There are specific events and times perhaps that latin-trends came into usage and I'm sure each one has a different story.  The terribly translated recent Ruthenian divine liturgy is an example where Rome didn't tell the bishops in the USA to do it, they just did it but Rome did approve it. 
I have seen former RC converts who are orthodox priests invent their own "junk" into liturgy and then have the parish pick it up as practice. 

So basically the Ruthenians did it to themselves.  That's too bad.  What were they thinking? 
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #80 on: March 09, 2012, 07:54:51 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?

It's a generalization.  There are specific events and times perhaps that latin-trends came into usage and I'm sure each one has a different story.  The terribly translated recent Ruthenian divine liturgy is an example where Rome didn't tell the bishops in the USA to do it, they just did it but Rome did approve it. 

Who appointed those bishops?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #81 on: March 09, 2012, 08:20:38 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?

If I understood your question correctly (and I'm not sure that I did), I'd just say that the vast majority of Western Catholics that I know of do not pray before icons when praying privately, whereas many, if not most, Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics do.  (Interesting to note that a number of Orthodox I know *only* come into the presence of icons at church.)  So, yes, one could fairly accurately say that praying before icons is more common (but by no means exclusive) to Eastern traditions than to Western.
so is confessing the Universal Creed of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, but that doesn't make that Ecumenical Creed more Eastern.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #82 on: March 09, 2012, 08:20:39 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?
We heretical-schismatic-apostate-rationalist Latins tend to pray before statues.  Grin
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #83 on: March 09, 2012, 08:20:39 PM »

Most of the time the GCs disobeyed Rome by latinizing themselves.
LOL.  The Vatican would have to forbid it for them to disobey.  What the Vatican did to the Italo-Greeks, however, doesn't reveal a history of such a prohibition.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #84 on: March 09, 2012, 08:20:39 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.
Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #85 on: March 09, 2012, 08:27:34 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.
Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.
mmmmm. Latin dogmas. Papist said in the voice of Homer Simpson.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #86 on: March 09, 2012, 08:30:53 PM »

Is there such a thing as a "Latin dogma"? A dogma is a dogma. How can something be a dogma only for the Latin Rite and not for the whole Church?
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #87 on: March 09, 2012, 08:32:39 PM »

Is there such a thing as a "Latin dogma"? A dogma is a dogma. How can something be a dogma only for the Latin Rite and not for the whole Church?
agreed.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #88 on: March 09, 2012, 08:38:29 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

Wow, really?

I suppose any Orthodox convert is just "LARPing".

Seriously, Michal, the way you asked that question isn't cool.

Most of the posters that answered the OP are either jumpers from the Latin Rite or converts from other religious groups. With all the repsect I wouldn't agree that they share sentiments and stereotypes with the cradle ECs. IMO if one would like to know the opinion of the ECs on the RCs they should not ask the RC to EC jumpers because it would be falsified.

I'm not questioning the dedication of the strength of faith of the aforementioned posters. I don't care about them. I only think that their opinion has nothing in common with the opinion of the majority of the Eastern Catholics. They are not representative.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #89 on: March 09, 2012, 08:42:52 PM »

Is there such a thing as a "Latin dogma"? A dogma is a dogma. How can something be a dogma only for the Latin Rite and not for the whole Church?
agreed.

+1

What a shame, though hardly unexpected, that we seem to have moved so far from your original questions.  Hopefully this thread won't disintegrate into the kind of un-Christian sniping and one-upmanship that so many others have.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #90 on: March 09, 2012, 08:54:39 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

Wow, really?

I suppose any Orthodox convert is just "LARPing".

Seriously, Michal, the way you asked that question isn't cool.

Most of the posters that answered the OP are either jumpers from the Latin Rite or converts from other religious groups. With all the repsect I wouldn't agree that they share sentiments and stereotypes with the cradle ECs. IMO if one would like to know the opinion of the ECs on the RCs they should not ask the RC to EC jumpers because it would be falsified.

I'm not questioning the dedication of the strength of faith of the aforementioned posters. I don't care about them. I only think that their opinion has nothing in common with the opinion of the majority of the Eastern Catholics. They are not representative.
Why do you think that only cradle Eastern Catholics should be allowed to weigh in? Are you saying that converts are either liars or stupid? I was a Protestant all of my life before becoming a Roman Rite Catholic in 2007. Are you saying that I have no understanding of Roman Catholicism?
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #91 on: March 09, 2012, 09:36:50 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.
Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.
mmmmm. Latin dogmas. Papist said in the voice of Homer Simpson.

Mmmm. Forbidden dogmas.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #92 on: March 09, 2012, 09:37:53 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.
Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.
mmmmm. Latin dogmas. Papist said in the voice of Homer Simpson.

Mmmm. Forbidden dogmas.

Naughty.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #93 on: March 09, 2012, 09:40:49 PM »

But seriously,

Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.

I don't think you've been reading carefully ...

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.

was elaborated on later in the same thread:

Quote from: mardukm
Quote
Indeed, those anti-Catholics ideas that the pope isn't head of the whole church, or that Mary wasn't immaculately conceived etc., aren't the real Orthodox teachings.
Those are not examples of polemics or anti-Catholic ideas. Those are simply their beliefs.

Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #94 on: March 09, 2012, 10:04:02 PM »

Then you have the tiny minority of self-styled 'Orthodox in communion with Rome' who repeat all the Orthodox anti-Roman views but stay for some reason.

In my experience, it's dangerous to draw conclusions about an Eastern Catholic based on the fact that he/she calls himself/herself 'Orthodox in communion with Rome'.
Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.
mmmmm. Latin dogmas. Papist said in the voice of Homer Simpson.

Mmmm. Forbidden dogmas.
Ha!!! I really did just LOL
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #95 on: March 09, 2012, 10:21:06 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

Wow, really?

I suppose any Orthodox convert is just "LARPing".

Seriously, Michal, the way you asked that question isn't cool.

Personally, i find the term offensive and disrespectful. We are talking about  a person's communion with God not an online fantasy game. I would hope that it stops being used. I don't think Michal meant it in that way but I will let him speak for himself.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #96 on: March 09, 2012, 11:06:59 PM »

Is there such a thing as a "Latin dogma"? A dogma is a dogma. How can something be a dogma only for the Latin Rite and not for the whole Church?
agreed.
Ask your "magisterium":that's how they explain away the glaring differences between your Supreme Pontiff and those who have submitted to him in the East.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #97 on: March 09, 2012, 11:06:59 PM »

Are here any cradle ECs? Anyone that is not LARP-ing?

Wow, really?

I suppose any Orthodox convert is just "LARPing".

Seriously, Michal, the way you asked that question isn't cool.

Most of the posters that answered the OP are either jumpers from the Latin Rite or converts from other religious groups. With all the repsect I wouldn't agree that they share sentiments and stereotypes with the cradle ECs. IMO if one would like to know the opinion of the ECs on the RCs they should not ask the RC to EC jumpers because it would be falsified.

I'm not questioning the dedication of the strength of faith of the aforementioned posters. I don't care about them. I only think that their opinion has nothing in common with the opinion of the majority of the Eastern Catholics. They are not representative.
The distinction is often made between cradles and converts in Orthodoxy, with reason and without questioning the Faith of either.  No reason why the same can't be asked of the 22 other "sui juris churches."  That is, however, seperate from LARPing, as converts are not necessarily LARPers (and cradles have their own LARPing).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,850



« Reply #98 on: March 10, 2012, 12:24:35 AM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?

If I understood your question correctly (and I'm not sure that I did)

No, you didn't. Smiley I was talking in a more theoretical sense. I am indeed aware that most Latins are not well versed with Byzantine iconography and praying before icons but I was asking why praying with icons should be considered exclusively an Eastern tradition since it has strong theological basis also in Latin tradition. For me it seems that praying before icons is an universal tradition and hence we have icons in WRO parishes and monasteries. I see no reason why the situation couldn't be the same also in RC tradition.
Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #99 on: March 10, 2012, 12:48:54 AM »

Is there such a thing as a "Latin dogma"? A dogma is a dogma. How can something be a dogma only for the Latin Rite and not for the whole Church?
agreed.
Ask your "magisterium":that's how they explain away the glaring differences between your Supreme Pontiff and those who have submitted to him in the East.
There's a difference between an Eastern approach to Catholicism or Eastern lingo when referencing the truths of our faith (e.g. dormition vs. assumption) and an entirely different faith. Eastern Catholics still have to believe all the dogmas of the Catholic Church.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #100 on: March 10, 2012, 03:30:12 AM »

But seriously,

Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.

I don't think you've been reading carefully ...

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.

was elaborated on later in the same thread:

Quote from: mardukm
Quote
Indeed, those anti-Catholics ideas that the pope isn't head of the whole church, or that Mary wasn't immaculately conceived etc., aren't the real Orthodox teachings.
Those are not examples of polemics or anti-Catholic ideas. Those are simply their beliefs.

Oh, I've read plenty of posts of Mardukm here, on Byzcath and CAF.  But not the thread in question.  I'm going to bed now, but I'll try to take a look later, Lord willing, to see if the leopard has changed his spots.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #101 on: March 10, 2012, 03:30:12 AM »

Is there such a thing as a "Latin dogma"? A dogma is a dogma. How can something be a dogma only for the Latin Rite and not for the whole Church?
agreed.
Ask your "magisterium":that's how they explain away the glaring differences between your Supreme Pontiff and those who have submitted to him in the East.
There's a difference between an Eastern approach to Catholicism or Eastern lingo when referencing the truths of our faith (e.g. dormition vs. assumption) and an entirely different faith.

e.g. "from the Father" vs. "from the Father and the Son."
Eastern Catholics still have to believe all the dogmas of the Catholic Church.
We do.

I might just answer anything further on another thread, lest Michael's OP go unanswered.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #102 on: March 10, 2012, 04:58:01 AM »

Are you saying that I have no understanding of Roman Catholicism?

No but you propably have little understanding of the mentality, views, problems, legacy, traditions, superstitions and prejudices of most of the Roman Catholics. You don't share cultural background with them and that has nothing in common with faith.

I say that EC people with no roots in there have no full understanding of the EC situation and problems.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 07:20:50 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #103 on: March 10, 2012, 07:41:20 AM »

But seriously,

Most I have come across are like Mardukm, who call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" and claim that the Orthodox really believe the "Latin dogmas", e.g. IC, atonement, treasury of merit, the papal system, etc.

I don't think you've been reading carefully ...

Quote from: mardukm
Orthodox ideas are not wrong, but are valid and holy.

was elaborated on later in the same thread:

Quote from: mardukm
Quote
Indeed, those anti-Catholics ideas that the pope isn't head of the whole church, or that Mary wasn't immaculately conceived etc., aren't the real Orthodox teachings.
Those are not examples of polemics or anti-Catholic ideas. Those are simply their beliefs.

Oh, I've read plenty of posts of Mardukm here, on Byzcath and CAF.  But not the thread in question.  I'm going to bed now, but I'll try to take a look later, Lord willing, to see if the leopard has changed his spots.

My point was just that, according to his statements, it is "not wrong" but rather "valid and holy" for Orthodox to deny the IC or the pope's headship over the whole church. That's quite different from saying that "the Orthodox really believe the 'Latin dogmas'."

Is there such a thing as a "Latin dogma"? A dogma is a dogma. How can something be a dogma only for the Latin Rite and not for the whole Church?
agreed.
Ask your "magisterium":that's how they explain away the glaring differences between your Supreme Pontiff and those who have submitted to him in the East.

Mardukm is part of the magisterium?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #104 on: March 10, 2012, 08:35:50 AM »

use of Latin pascha date (which still occurs all over North America)

The priest at the first Melkite parish I belonged to (this is many years ago, before I moved to New England) explained it thus: Melkites follow the same Easter date as the majority in whatever place they are. In the case of the USA, the majority are Protestants.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 08:42:48 AM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #105 on: March 10, 2012, 11:37:10 AM »

use of Latin pascha date (which still occurs all over North America)

The priest at the first Melkite parish I belonged to (this is many years ago, before I moved to New England) explained it thus: Melkites follow the same Easter date as the majority in whatever place they are. In the case of the USA, the majority are Protestants.

Let us not forget that the Autonomous Orthodox Church of Finland (EP) uses the Latin Pascha date.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #106 on: March 10, 2012, 12:08:44 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?

If I understood your question correctly (and I'm not sure that I did)

No, you didn't. Smiley I was talking in a more theoretical sense. I am indeed aware that most Latins are not well versed with Byzantine iconography and praying before icons but I was asking why praying with icons should be considered exclusively an Eastern tradition since it has strong theological basis also in Latin tradition. For me it seems that praying before icons is an universal tradition and hence we have icons in WRO parishes and monasteries. I see no reason why the situation couldn't be the same also in RC tradition.

Got it!  Let me try again... Embarrassed  I don't know that praying with icons *is* considered *exclusively* Eastern, although much more associated with the Christian East than the Christian West.  I'd think that it is more of a cultural influence than a theological one, especially given the presence of icons in Western churches, monasteries, etc., etc.  Different practices develop differently in different cultures.  Without getting into an argument about what constitutes an icon, at its most basic level it is simply an image or likeness that stands for or represents something else.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #107 on: March 10, 2012, 12:59:04 PM »

praying before icons

Huh? You have ancient Latin churches filled with Byzantine-ish icons and 7. Ecumenical Council and you still consider that as an Eastern tradition?

If I understood your question correctly (and I'm not sure that I did)

No, you didn't. Smiley I was talking in a more theoretical sense. I am indeed aware that most Latins are not well versed with Byzantine iconography and praying before icons but I was asking why praying with icons should be considered exclusively an Eastern tradition since it has strong theological basis also in Latin tradition. For me it seems that praying before icons is an universal tradition and hence we have icons in WRO parishes and monasteries. I see no reason why the situation couldn't be the same also in RC tradition.

Got it!  Let me try again... Embarrassed  I don't know that praying with icons *is* considered *exclusively* Eastern, although much more associated with the Christian East than the Christian West.  I'd think that it is more of a cultural influence than a theological one, especially given the presence of icons in Western churches, monasteries, etc., etc.  Different practices develop differently in different cultures.  Without getting into an argument about what constitutes an icon, at its most basic level it is simply an image or likeness that stands for or represents something else.
Yes. My point was just that Eastern Catholics tend to pray with traditional icons, whereas Western Catholics tend to pray with statues, and religious art that was developed during the Medieval period and on.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #108 on: March 10, 2012, 01:47:49 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?

It's a generalization.  There are specific events and times perhaps that latin-trends came into usage and I'm sure each one has a different story.  The terribly translated recent Ruthenian divine liturgy is an example where Rome didn't tell the bishops in the USA to do it, they just did it but Rome did approve it. 

Who appointed those bishops?


Rome did.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #109 on: March 10, 2012, 06:27:09 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?

It's a generalization.  There are specific events and times perhaps that latin-trends came into usage and I'm sure each one has a different story.  The terribly translated recent Ruthenian divine liturgy is an example where Rome didn't tell the bishops in the USA to do it, they just did it but Rome did approve it. 

Who appointed those bishops?


Rome did.

I see. (scratch chin in dramatic fashion)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #110 on: March 10, 2012, 06:47:27 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?

It's a generalization.  There are specific events and times perhaps that latin-trends came into usage and I'm sure each one has a different story.  The terribly translated recent Ruthenian divine liturgy is an example where Rome didn't tell the bishops in the USA to do it, they just did it but Rome did approve it. 

Who appointed those bishops?


Rome did.

I see. (scratch chin in dramatic fashion)

Ok, so I gather the Ruthenian Byz.Cath church picks the candidate and sends it to Rome for approval.  In fact was it not an issue recently that Rome wanted to approve of the UGCC bishops in UA and the UGCC was doing so for quite some time before Rome started doing this again?
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #111 on: March 10, 2012, 06:58:58 PM »

^ Yes, the Churches pick their candidates and Rome approves them. That even happens in the Latin Church. The Bishops send the names of several candidates to Rome in order to fill a open see. Then Rome approves one of the candidates.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #112 on: March 10, 2012, 07:02:03 PM »

^ Yes, the Churches pick their candidates and Rome approves them. That even happens in the Latin Church. The Bishops send the names of several candidates to Rome in order to fill a open see. Then Rome approves one of the candidates.

No, the Roman Pope can nominate whoever he wants for the Churches not headed by Patriarchs. These list are just suggestions.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #113 on: March 10, 2012, 07:05:13 PM »

^ Yes, the Churches pick their candidates and Rome approves them. That even happens in the Latin Church. The Bishops send the names of several candidates to Rome in order to fill a open see. Then Rome approves one of the candidates.

No, the Roman Pope can nominate whoever he wants for the Churches not headed by Patriarchs. These list are just suggestions.
Actually, yes. The Pope normally picks from the suggested list of names. Of course he can pick someone else, but the way he normally exercises his primacy is with in conjunction with the Bishops.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #114 on: March 10, 2012, 07:10:37 PM »

^ Yes, the Churches pick their candidates and Rome approves them. That even happens in the Latin Church. The Bishops send the names of several candidates to Rome in order to fill a open see. Then Rome approves one of the candidates.

No, the Roman Pope can nominate whoever he wants for the Churches not headed by Patriarchs. These list are just suggestions.
Actually, yes. The Pope normally picks from the suggested list of names.

He doesn't have to.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #115 on: March 10, 2012, 07:25:02 PM »

^ Yes, the Churches pick their candidates and Rome approves them.

You're just talking about eparchies in the West, right?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #116 on: March 10, 2012, 07:26:16 PM »

^ Yes, the Churches pick their candidates and Rome approves them.

You're just talking about eparchies in the West, right?

Pope chooses every Bishop that is not not from the Church headed by Patriarch. Not only form the candidated but whoever he wishes.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2012, 07:27:19 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #117 on: March 10, 2012, 07:28:08 PM »

^ Yes, the Churches pick their candidates and Rome approves them.

You're just talking about eparchies in the West, right?

Pope chooses every Bishop that is not not from the Church headed by Patriarch. Not only form the candidated but whoever he wishes.


Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.
Logged

mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #118 on: March 10, 2012, 07:30:37 PM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #119 on: March 10, 2012, 09:17:43 PM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.

That's news to me.  I was under the impression that only happened outside of their Canonical Territory.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #120 on: March 10, 2012, 09:20:25 PM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.

The following appears here: http://www.americancatholic.org/Messenger/Sep2002/Wiseman.asp#F2 



"How Are Bishops Selected?

Q: How are bishops appointed in the  United States? Does this vary from other parts of the world? Are Roman Catholic bishops appointed the same way as Eastern Catholic bishops?

A: The 178 Latin-rite dioceses and archdioceses in the United States are grouped into 31 ecclesiastical provinces. In most cases these include a single state; a few include several states. Only California has two archdioceses (Los Angeles and San Francisco).

Periodically, the bishops in an ecclesiastical province meet to suggest names of priests who could be appointed bishop. They discuss the men proposed and pass their assessment on to the nuncio, the pope’s representative in Washington, D.C. The nuncio sends a questionnaire to people who know these priests well, asking for assessments in several categories.

When the head of a diocese requests an auxiliary bishop, he draws up a list of three names (not limited to priests already suggested), rates them and sends them to the nuncio.

When a bishop is needed to head a diocese, the nuncio consults with the bishops of the ecclesiastical province to which that diocese belongs, with the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (who has a three-year term) and with others as the nuncio wishes.

In time, he will send three names (and his evaluation of each) to the Congregation of Bishops in Rome. That congregation has bishop-members, appointed by the pope, who meet almost weekly—except during the summer. The members study the recommendations already made and submit their preferred candidate and two alternate candidates to the pope, who is free to ask the congregation to consider other candidates and propose other names. In the end, the pope makes the choice.

In countries under the jurisdiction of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, that congregation enters into the process. The same is true for areas under the jurisdiction of the Congregation for Eastern Churches. In a few cases, the Holy See’s Secretariat of State is involved.

The procedure followed in the United States is basically the same one followed in other parts of the world now. In a few European dioceses, the cathedral chapter (a group of priests from the diocese) has the right to propose three names as head of the diocese, but the final choice is still made by the pope.

In the 19th and 20th centuries, certain governments had concordats (treaties) with the Holy See, giving those governments a role in appointing bishops. In most cases, more recent concordats have cancelled that role. In some countries, the pope’s representative is called an apostolic delegate because the Holy See and that country do not have formal diplomatic relations. In that case, the apostolic delegate does the nuncio’s work described above.

In some Eastern Catholic Churches, a bishop is elected by its synod of bishops; the pope then expresses his approval by expressing “ecclesial communion” with the new bishop.
"   (my emphases)

So, Michal, you are right.  But not entirely.  You make it sound much more simple and monarchical than it actually is.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #121 on: March 10, 2012, 09:42:27 PM »

In some Eastern Catholic Churches, a bishop is elected by its synod of bishops; the pope then expresses his approval by expressing “ecclesial communion” with the new bishop. [/i]"   (my emphases)

I believe that doesn't apply outside of their Canonical Territories.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #122 on: March 11, 2012, 08:00:36 AM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.

Wrong.  Churches headed by a Major Archbishop also elect their own bishops in their home territory.  It is only in the diaspora the Pope appoints and he almost always follows the recommendation of the Synod, becasue when he hasn't there has been trouble. 
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #123 on: March 11, 2012, 08:45:17 AM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.

Wrong.  Churches headed by a Major Archbishop also elect their own bishops in their home territory.  It is only in the diaspora the Pope appoints and he almost always follows the recommendation of the Synod, becasue when he hasn't there has been trouble. 

Ah thank you. I was pretty sure that was the case.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #124 on: March 11, 2012, 10:49:08 AM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.

Wrong.  Churches headed by a Major Archbishop also elect their own bishops in their home territory.  It is only in the diaspora the Pope appoints and he almost always follows the recommendation of the Synod, becasue when he hasn't there has been trouble. 

Ah yes, "there has been trouble" in our communities isn't for the faint of heart.  I don't think the pope would have the wherewithal to personally appoint say a bishop in the passaic diocese of the Ruthenian Catholic Church.  Imagine if he picked a trappist monk from oregon of french background to be that bishop who never attended a parish in the coalfields of Pennsylvania nor a Greek Catholic church.  It wouldn't turn out too good and I think the guy would probably run away fast.  Hence, they let them pick their own and get the pope's stamp on the issue.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #125 on: March 11, 2012, 12:19:51 PM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.

Wrong.  Churches headed by a Major Archbishop also elect their own bishops in their home territory.  It is only in the diaspora the Pope appoints and he almost always follows the recommendation of the Synod, becasue when he hasn't there has been trouble. 

Ah yes, "there has been trouble" in our communities isn't for the faint of heart.  I don't think the pope would have the wherewithal to personally appoint say a bishop in the passaic diocese of the Ruthenian Catholic Church.  Imagine if he picked a trappist monk from oregon of french background to be that bishop who never attended a parish in the coalfields of Pennsylvania nor a Greek Catholic church.  It wouldn't turn out too good and I think the guy would probably run away fast.  Hence, they let them pick their own and get the pope's stamp on the issue.

It seems like you're setting up a false dichotomy: that either the Pope just rubber stamps the ECs' choice (and hence doesn't "personally appoint" someone) or he picks someone completely inappropriate.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #126 on: March 11, 2012, 12:23:53 PM »

Well, does the pope personally talk to all what, several thousand bishops world wide on a regular basis?
And a recorded Christmas message with the bishop's name dubbed over for each individual doesn't count.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #127 on: March 11, 2012, 12:54:36 PM »

Well, does the pope personally talk to all what, several thousand bishops world wide on a regular basis?

I don't think so. Why? (Assuming you were asking me.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #128 on: March 11, 2012, 01:19:16 PM »

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?  Does that come out of an overall anti-Catholic bias, or out of a bias against things "Latin" or Roman Catholic?

It is easier to blame others I suppose.  The other big Latinization is the appointment of bishops by Rome rather than election by Synod.  And Rome had the tendency to appoint bishops who were willing to let the status quo remain rather than reform.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #129 on: March 11, 2012, 01:53:19 PM »

Most of the posters that answered the OP are either jumpers from the Latin Rite or converts from other religious groups. With all the repsect I wouldn't agree that they share sentiments and stereotypes with the cradle ECs. IMO if one would like to know the opinion of the ECs on the RCs they should not ask the RC to EC jumpers because it would be falsified.

I'm not questioning the dedication of the strength of faith of the aforementioned posters. I don't care about them. I only think that their opinion has nothing in common with the opinion of the majority of the Eastern Catholics. They are not representative.

In America at least, there are very few if any "pure" Greek Catholic families.  Almost all Greek Catholics here have a mixed background, so much so that when they grow up and move away they attend Roman Catholic parish because it is just not a big deal.  One of our priests estimates that possibly 80% of those who are canonically Greek Catholic attend Roman parishes.  So whether one is a mixed background "cradle" or a mixed bbackground "jumper" the opinions and attitudes are very much shared.  In fact the "jumpers" are often more authentically Eastern becasue they made the choice to be Greek Catholic whereas many "cradles" simple go to the closest parish which is usually Roman.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,572


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #130 on: March 11, 2012, 02:00:02 PM »

Which would not include the UGCC (Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church) or the Ruthenian Byzantine Church or the Greek Catholic Church in Mukachevo and Slovakia  as none have a patriarch.

Exactly. Each and every UGCC Bishop is chosen by Benedict XVI.

Wrong.  Churches headed by a Major Archbishop also elect their own bishops in their home territory.  It is only in the diaspora the Pope appoints and he almost always follows the recommendation of the Synod, becasue when he hasn't there has been trouble. 

Ah yes, "there has been trouble" in our communities isn't for the faint of heart.  I don't think the pope would have the wherewithal to personally appoint say a bishop in the passaic diocese of the Ruthenian Catholic Church.  Imagine if he picked a trappist monk from oregon of french background to be that bishop who never attended a parish in the coalfields of Pennsylvania nor a Greek Catholic church.  It wouldn't turn out too good and I think the guy would probably run away fast.  Hence, they let them pick their own and get the pope's stamp on the issue.

Going back to the first bishop sent by Rome to America for both the Ruthenians(Carpatho-Rusyns) and Galicians (Ukrainians)  in 1907 - Bishop Soter Ortynsky things didn't work out that well - at least for the Ruthenians - now the BCC. In Europe, the faithful were used to the selection of their Bishops by the traditional means of Synodal election (for the most part) and the appointment of a non-Rusyn Bishop for the Rusyn parishes was one in a number of errors made by Rome with respect to the Greek Catholics in the first half of the 20th century. That was followed by the appointment of the pro-Magyar Bishop Basil Takach which led to the second(or third) schism within the Greek Catholic Church and the establishment of ACROD.
Logged
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #131 on: March 11, 2012, 02:37:09 PM »

In America at least, there are very few if any "pure" Greek Catholic families.  Almost all Greek Catholics here have a mixed background, so much so that when they grow up and move away they attend Roman Catholic parish because it is just not a big deal.  One of our priests estimates that possibly 80% of those who are canonically Greek Catholic attend Roman parishes.  So whether one is a mixed background "cradle" or a mixed-background "jumper" the opinions and attitudes are very much shared.  In fact the "jumpers" are often more authentically Eastern because they made the choice to be Greek Catholic whereas many "cradles" simple go to the closest parish which is usually Roman.

Regarding the first part, another reason why cradle Greek Catholics are essentially 'superior Novus Ordo'. Another reason they lose so many: they move away and go Roman Rite, on top of the attrition to the larger culture that the Orthodox have (when the third, etc. generation doesn't identify with the ethnic group anymore – I don't think manufacturing a whitebread American Orthodoxy/Greek Catholicism is the answer; I don't know the answer).

Regarding the second, I hear you, but...

The way many such jumpers want to be authentically traditional and Byzantine, exactly what Rome wants in that department, is admirable. But I agree with the poster above that they don't represent most Greek Catholics. Most Greek Catholics = 'authentic' Greek Catholicism, like it or not. And you don't want to make cradles resent the well-meaning newcomers.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #132 on: March 11, 2012, 02:39:48 PM »

Most of the posters that answered the OP are either jumpers from the Latin Rite or converts from other religious groups. With all the repsect I wouldn't agree that they share sentiments and stereotypes with the cradle ECs. IMO if one would like to know the opinion of the ECs on the RCs they should not ask the RC to EC jumpers because it would be falsified.

I'm not questioning the dedication of the strength of faith of the aforementioned posters. I don't care about them. I only think that their opinion has nothing in common with the opinion of the majority of the Eastern Catholics. They are not representative.

In America at least, there are very few if any "pure" Greek Catholic families.  Almost all Greek Catholics here have a mixed background, so much so that when they grow up and move away they attend Roman Catholic parish because it is just not a big deal.  One of our priests estimates that possibly 80% of those who are canonically Greek Catholic attend Roman parishes.  So whether one is a mixed background "cradle" or a mixed bbackground "jumper" the opinions and attitudes are very much shared.  In fact the "jumpers" are often more authentically Eastern becasue they made the choice to be Greek Catholic whereas many "cradles" simple go to the closest parish which is usually Roman.

Here's something else I was reading recently:

Quote from: Anthony T. Dragani
Archbishop Joseph Tawil, a revered leader of the Byzantine Melkite Catholic Church, cautioned against an emphasis on ethnicity. Much like the late Metropolitan Judson Procyk, Archbishop Tawil envisioned an Eastern Catholic Church open to all Americans. He eloquently spoke of this in a famous Christmas pastoral letter:

One day all of our ethnic traits " language, folklore, customs " will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we cannot think of our communities as ethnic parishes, primarily for the service of the immigrant or ethnically oriented, unless we wish to assure the death of our community. Our Churches are not only for our own people but are also for any of our fellow Americans who are attracted to our traditions which show forth the beauty of the universal Church and the variety of its riches.[8]

Archbishop Joseph warns of the danger of our Church vanishing in North America. Research indicates that this is a very real possibility. The best evidence clearly suggests that parishes that neglect evangelization tend to stagnate or decline in America.[9] Studies show that the typical congregation will lose 6% to 10% of its membership annually.[10] This loss is attributed to parishioners dying, relocating, and dropping out. For a parish to thrive, it must annually replace these lost members " or face eventual extinction.

There is a prevalent false assumption in how these lost members are to be replaced. Most Byzantine Catholic parishes wrongly assume that the children will take their place. The sad truth is that most of the children raised in our parishes will not be there as adults. In our transient society, most of these children will either move away or join other Churches. Very often less than 10% of the children found in a parish will remain there in adulthood.[11]

http://www.east2west.org/evangelization.htm
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #133 on: March 11, 2012, 02:44:32 PM »

In America at least, there are very few if any "pure" Greek Catholic families.  Almost all Greek Catholics here have a mixed background, so much so that when they grow up and move away they attend Roman Catholic parish because it is just not a big deal.  One of our priests estimates that possibly 80% of those who are canonically Greek Catholic attend Roman parishes.  So whether one is a mixed background "cradle" or a mixed-background "jumper" the opinions and attitudes are very much shared.  In fact the "jumpers" are often more authentically Eastern because they made the choice to be Greek Catholic whereas many "cradles" simple go to the closest parish which is usually Roman.

Regarding the first part, another reason why cradle Greek Catholics are essentially 'superior Novus Ordo'. Another reason they lose so many: they move away and go Roman Rite, on top of the attrition to the larger culture that the Orthodox have (when the third, etc. generation doesn't identify with the ethnic group anymore – I don't think manufacturing a whitebread American Orthodoxy/Greek Catholicism is the answer; I don't know the answer).

Regarding the second, I hear you, but...

The way many such jumpers want to be authentically traditional and Byzantine, exactly what Rome wants in that department, is admirable. But I agree with the poster above that they don't represent most Greek Catholics. Most Greek Catholics = 'authentic' Greek Catholicism, like it or not. And you don't want to make cradles resent the well-meaning newcomers.

It's also questionable whether what Rome wants should be paramount.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #134 on: March 11, 2012, 02:48:18 PM »

It's also questionable whether what Rome wants should be paramount.

It seems to me it ought to matter a lot to those running and attending the Greek Catholic churches, since after all they're under Rome! It falls under discipline, the rules for running those churches.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #135 on: March 11, 2012, 02:59:45 PM »

It's also questionable whether what Rome wants should be paramount.

It seems to me it ought to matter a lot to those running and attending the Greek Catholic churches, since after all they're under Rome! It falls under discipline, the rules for running those churches.

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #136 on: March 11, 2012, 03:16:23 PM »

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Heh. Of course the answer is Rome wants them to because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good. The more they flourish in the Greek Catholic churches, the more credible union with Rome looks.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 03:38:22 PM by The young fogey » Logged

Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,941


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #137 on: March 11, 2012, 03:24:16 PM »

Most Greek Catholics = 'authentic' Greek Catholicism, like it or not.

But what equals "most Greek Catholics" ?  I would counter that the 80-90% attending Roman Catholic parishes are not Greek Catholic other than canonically.  They certainly don't represent those actually attending Greek Catholic parishes.  So to me most Greek Catholics are those actually attending Greek Catholic parishes.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #138 on: March 11, 2012, 03:37:50 PM »

Most Greek Catholics = 'authentic' Greek Catholicism, like it or not.

But what equals "most Greek Catholics" ?  I would counter that the 80-90% attending Roman Catholic parishes are not Greek Catholic other than canonically.  They certainly don't represent those actually attending Greek Catholic parishes.  So to me most Greek Catholics are those actually attending Greek Catholic parishes.

That's who I was thinking of.
Logged

username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,068



« Reply #139 on: March 11, 2012, 07:02:36 PM »

It's also questionable whether what Rome wants should be paramount.

It seems to me it ought to matter a lot to those running and attending the Greek Catholic churches, since after all they're under Rome! It falls under discipline, the rules for running those churches.

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Historically we know what real de-latinization is.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #140 on: March 11, 2012, 07:18:16 PM »

It's also questionable whether what Rome wants should be paramount.

It seems to me it ought to matter a lot to those running and attending the Greek Catholic churches, since after all they're under Rome! It falls under discipline, the rules for running those churches.

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Historically we know what real de-latinization is.

We do? I mean, we do!
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #141 on: March 11, 2012, 07:21:37 PM »

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Heh. Of course the answer is Rome wants them to because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good. The more they flourish in the Greek Catholic churches, the more credible union with Rome looks.

Yes, the old Bridge Church plan.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #142 on: March 11, 2012, 08:15:27 PM »

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Heh. Of course the answer is Rome wants them to because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good. The more they flourish in the Greek Catholic churches, the more credible union with Rome looks.

Yes, the old Bridge Church plan.

Sure, with a few tweaks. With a one-true-church claim can Rome say anything else? I think an Orthodoxy under Rome is supposed to be what the Greek Catholic churches were supposed to be but weren't and aren't.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #143 on: March 11, 2012, 08:44:12 PM »

It's also questionable whether what Rome wants should be paramount.

It seems to me it ought to matter a lot to those running and attending the Greek Catholic churches, since after all they're under Rome! It falls under discipline, the rules for running those churches.

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Historically we know what real de-latinization is.

Oh, I think I just got that. You mean swimming the Bosphorus?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #144 on: March 11, 2012, 08:57:04 PM »

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Heh. Of course the answer is Rome wants them to because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good. The more they flourish in the Greek Catholic churches, the more credible union with Rome looks.

Yes, the old Bridge Church plan.

Sure, with a few tweaks. With a one-true-church claim can Rome say anything else? I think an Orthodoxy under Rome is supposed to be what the Greek Catholic churches were supposed to be but weren't and aren't.

On a side note, I have often heard it said that Pope John Paul II used the phrase "Orthodox in communion with Rome", yet I've never seen a quotation of the full passage in which he used it. Does anyone know what he said exactly?
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 08:57:56 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Montenero1439
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 32


« Reply #145 on: March 12, 2012, 10:27:22 PM »

Quote
First, how you understand your ecclesial position withe regard to both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics?

We are members of the Catholic Church. Eastern orthodox are schismatics.

Quote
Second, how is your experience of the Catholic faith different than that of Roman Catholics?

Customs and rite are different, but the faith is the same. Maybe more mystical.

Quote
Third, as a Byzantine Catholic, do you believe in Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, Transubstantiation, the Universal Jurisdiction of the Pope, and the Infallibility of the Pope?

We believe in original sin, in the immaculate conception, in purgatory, in transubstantiation(i only have a hard time to write it correctly), we believe in universal juridiction of the Pope and his infallibility.

Quote
If you don't believe in these things, do you think that Roman Catholics are in heresy or error?

We have to believe it, everything the magisterium teaches we believe it.

Quote
Fourth, do you see yourself as closer in faith and religious praxis to the Orthodox, than you do the Roman Catholics?
Quote

In some formal religious praxis we are closer to eastern orthodox(communion under both kind, epiklesis, married priests etc). But it is only, as said st photius :

“Everybody must preserve what was defined by common ecumenical decisions, but a particular opinion of a church father or a definition issued by a local council can be followed by some and ignored by others. Thus, some people customarily shave their beards; others reject this practice by local conciliar decrees. Thus, as far as we are concerned, we consider it reprehensible to fast on Saturdays, except once a year (on Holy Saturday), while others fast on other Saturdays as well. Thus, tradition avoids disputes by making practice prevail over the rule. In Rome, there are no priests legitimately married, while our tradition permits men, once married, to be elevated to the priesthood.
When the faith remains inviolate, common and catholic decisions are also safe; a sensible man respects the practices and laws of others; he considers it neither wrong to observe them nor illegal to violate them.”
St. Photius the Great to Pope Nicholas I of Rome in the year 861 A.D. “EP. 2, PG 102, cols. 604-605D.”
http://bekkos.wordpress.com/2007/11/03/bekkos-on-photiuss-motives/

For the Faith we have the same as the roman catholics. Eastern orthodox deny dogmas of the only true Church.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #146 on: March 12, 2012, 11:10:49 PM »

LOL. Welcome to the forum Montenero1439.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #147 on: March 13, 2012, 12:29:43 AM »

This should get innerestin'.

If you're not swimming the Bosphorus, you're swimming in Phosphorus.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 12:32:27 AM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
MarkosC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Patriarchate of Antioch
Jurisdiction: Greek/Melkite Catholic
Posts: 191


« Reply #148 on: March 13, 2012, 12:32:24 AM »

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Heh. Of course the answer is Rome wants them to because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good. The more they flourish in the Greek Catholic churches, the more credible union with Rome looks.

I disagree.  Wink  

The reason we should delatinize is because Latinizations are arbitrary additions that run counter to our way of prayer and worship, much like how egregious random departures from tradition on the Orthodox side (I've seen them) are counter to the way or prayer and worship, or how various "abuses" in the Latin liturgy are spiritually harmful for the Latins.  

The "Byzantine" typikon has its own spirituality, logic and reasoning.  Oftentimes, perhaps even the majority of times, "Latinization" happened for no good reason beyond "it's the local Latins want us to do so" or (even worse) "it's what we think the Latins want us to do and we'll do it so we fit in".  Putting these arbitrary things into our typikon (magnified by the fact that we often don't have the material or often even the spiritual resources to properly pray even a decent slice of the typikon) makes no sense, and destroys the rationale for why we pray what we pray.  

(I'm not opposed to change, but there are proper ways changes need to be made, i.e. slowly, with understanding of why we pray what we pray and do what we do, and with consideration and coordination with our eparchal and patriarchal hierarchy and with local sister churches who share our way of prayer.  Deviations from the books should be done for  carefully chosen spiritual benefit, rather than because we think they're cool, because we think it will make us fit in, or because it fits a pastoral plan we dreamed up any less than a decade ago).

To the OP: I will make an answer, it'll take a while though.  
Logged

O Lord although I desired to blot out
with my tears the handwriting of my many sins
And for the rest of my life to please Thee
through sincere repentance
Yet doth the enemy lead me astray as he wareth
against my sould with his cunning

O Lord before I utterly perish do Thou save me!
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #149 on: March 13, 2012, 08:31:18 AM »

MarkosC, I like the cut of your jib.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #150 on: March 13, 2012, 08:32:52 AM »

This should get innerestin'.

If you're not swimming the Bosphorus, you're swimming in Phosphorus.

Hmmm, maybe I'll use that in my signature.

  Are you swimming the Bosphorus,
  Or are you swimming in Phosphorus?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Montenero1439
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 32


« Reply #151 on: March 13, 2012, 08:37:14 AM »

"We have no more right to think less of them than they have to despise us. This has always been most clearly the attitude of the Holy See, best summed up in the immortal words of Benedict XIV: 'Eastern Christians should be Catholics; they have no need to become Latins.' For our Lord gave his followers most explicit commands that they should belong to the one Catholic Church he founded; He never commanded them all to say their prayers in Latin or to use the Roman rite." Fr. Adrian Fortescue, The Uniate Eastern Churches Pg. 44

"The Church of Jesus Christ is neither Latin nor Greek nor Slav but Catholic; accordingly she makes no difference between her children, and Greek, Latins, Slavs, and members of all other nations are equal in the eyes of the Apostolic See." - Pope Benedict XV
Logged
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #152 on: March 13, 2012, 08:50:45 AM »

Well put, Montenero. That's what the Catholic Church teaches.

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Heh. Of course the answer is Rome wants them to because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good. The more they flourish in the Greek Catholic churches, the more credible union with Rome looks.

I disagree.  Wink  

The reason we should delatinize is because Latinizations are arbitrary additions that run counter to our way of prayer and worship...

That seems to mean the same as 'because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good'. So where do you disagree with me?
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #153 on: March 13, 2012, 09:58:58 AM »

This should get innerestin'.

If you're not swimming the Bosphorus, you're swimming in Phosphorus.
 

I swam (well, floated, is more like it) in the Dead Sea.  Does that count for anything? Grin Grin

Nothin' like a good mineral bath, eh?  Grin
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Montenero1439
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 32


« Reply #154 on: March 13, 2012, 10:14:17 AM »

LOL. Welcome to the forum Montenero1439.

Thanks Smiley
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #155 on: March 13, 2012, 01:02:59 PM »

This should get innerestin'.

If you're not swimming the Bosphorus, you're swimming in Phosphorus.
There's always the Volga, the Nile, the Orontes, the Potomac/Hudson...even the Danube and Bug.  Many in Romania came home, and the Bug flowed back into the Dnieper (figuratively, not geographically).

And then, we always have the Jordan.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #156 on: March 13, 2012, 08:41:43 PM »

Going back to the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" topic, something else I just read on catholic.com (though not the same thread as before) seems pretty relevant:

Quote from: Ghosty
As for reunion, it's hard to say what would happen. The Antiochian Patriarchate (Byzantine) already reunited with the Church of Rome, and the result was that the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate was recreated to replace it. There will likely always be some splinter group that wants to maintain separation, and they will elevate their own Patriarch if the current one reunites with Rome. It seems like a never-ending process to me. :shrug:
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #157 on: March 13, 2012, 08:56:49 PM »

Going back to the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" topic, something else I just read on catholic.com (though not the same thread as before) seems pretty relevant:

Quote from: Ghosty
As for reunion, it's hard to say what would happen. The Antiochian Patriarchate (Byzantine) already reunited with the Church of Rome, and the result was that the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate was recreated to replace it. There will likely always be some splinter group that wants to maintain separation, and they will elevate their own Patriarch if the current one reunites with Rome. It seems like a never-ending process to me. :shrug:


True.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #158 on: March 13, 2012, 09:09:47 PM »

Going back to the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" topic, something else I just read on catholic.com (though not the same thread as before) seems pretty relevant:

Quote from: Ghosty
As for reunion, it's hard to say what would happen. The Antiochian Patriarchate (Byzantine) already reunited with the Church of Rome, and the result was that the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate was recreated to replace it. There will likely always be some splinter group that wants to maintain separation, and they will elevate their own Patriarch if the current one reunites with Rome. It seems like a never-ending process to me. :shrug:


True.

So you agree that it's relevant?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #159 on: March 13, 2012, 09:41:41 PM »

Going back to the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" topic, something else I just read on catholic.com (though not the same thread as before) seems pretty relevant:

Quote from: Ghosty
As for reunion, it's hard to say what would happen. The Antiochian Patriarchate (Byzantine) already reunited with the Church of Rome, and the result was that the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate was recreated to replace it. There will likely always be some splinter group that wants to maintain separation, and they will elevate their own Patriarch if the current one reunites with Rome. It seems like a never-ending process to me. :shrug:


True.

So you agree that it's relevant?

I'm saying that what Ghosty said is true.
Logged

MarkosC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Patriarchate of Antioch
Jurisdiction: Greek/Melkite Catholic
Posts: 191


« Reply #160 on: March 13, 2012, 09:47:56 PM »

Well put, Montenero. That's what the Catholic Church teaches.

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Heh. Of course the answer is Rome wants them to because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good. The more they flourish in the Greek Catholic churches, the more credible union with Rome looks.

I disagree.  Wink  

The reason we should delatinize is because Latinizations are arbitrary additions that run counter to our way of prayer and worship...

That seems to mean the same as 'because those Orthodox traditions are in themselves good'. So where do you disagree with me?

Ooops, not quite.  I meant more with the statement PeterJ made, with the Wink.   Wink

As far as Ghosty's quote, see the one I made on That Other Forum.   Wink
Logged

O Lord although I desired to blot out
with my tears the handwriting of my many sins
And for the rest of my life to please Thee
through sincere repentance
Yet doth the enemy lead me astray as he wareth
against my sould with his cunning

O Lord before I utterly perish do Thou save me!
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #161 on: March 13, 2012, 10:03:52 PM »

Going back to the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" topic, something else I just read on catholic.com (though not the same thread as before) seems pretty relevant:

Quote from: Ghosty
As for reunion, it's hard to say what would happen. The Antiochian Patriarchate (Byzantine) already reunited with the Church of Rome, and the result was that the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate was recreated to replace it. There will likely always be some splinter group that wants to maintain separation, and they will elevate their own Patriarch if the current one reunites with Rome. It seems like a never-ending process to me. :shrug:


True.

So you agree that it's relevant?

I'm saying that what Ghosty said is true.

Well that's good too. And more surprising.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #162 on: March 14, 2012, 10:39:00 AM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?

Regarding "'imposed' Latinizations", a good example to consider is Canon 209 of the CCEO.

Quote
Canon 209

1. The eparchial bishop must commemorate the Roman Pontiff

before all as a sign of full communion with him in the Divine

Liturgy and the divine praises according to the prescriptions of

the liturgical books and to see to it that it be faithfully done

by the other clergy of the eparchy. 2. The eparchial bishop

must be commemorated by all the clergy in the Divine Liturgy and

the divine praises according to the prescriptions of the liturgical books.

I hope you will all excuse my whining.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 10:43:35 AM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #163 on: March 14, 2012, 10:46:19 AM »

So the real reason they should delatinize is that Rome wants them too?

Wink

Freudian slip I guess.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #164 on: March 19, 2012, 03:37:52 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?

Regarding "'imposed' Latinizations", a good example to consider is Canon 209 of the CCEO.

Quote
Canon 209

1. The eparchial bishop must commemorate the Roman Pontiff

before all as a sign of full communion with him in the Divine

Liturgy and the divine praises according to the prescriptions of

the liturgical books and to see to it that it be faithfully done

by the other clergy of the eparchy. 2. The eparchial bishop

must be commemorated by all the clergy in the Divine Liturgy and

the divine praises according to the prescriptions of the liturgical books.

I hope you will all excuse my whining.

First of all, I didn't notice you were whining  Wink

Secondly, very generally speaking when one speaks or writes about anything being "imposed", as in "imposed Latinizations", there is usually a negative connotation associated with it.  Since Eastern Catholics are, by definition, in communion with Rome and the Pope, it seems quite natural and logical that the Pope would be commemorated in the Divine Liturgy.  Are you implying that that is an "imposed" Latinization?  And if so, how is it?  If EC's were unwilling to commemorate him, then it seems they wouldn't be in communion with him and would, therefor, be Orthodox rather than Catholic.  I'm not saying you're wrong, just trying to understand.  Am I missing something about this?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #165 on: March 19, 2012, 04:43:29 PM »

I can understand them EC praying for the pope, however, the choice of words could be better. I have no idea what an ecumenical pontiff is. I know that in that in some Orthodox jurisdictions we commemorate the Primate and have been told that this is not correct. (can't say whether this is true or not.) I was told that we should only be commemorating our bishop who will commemorate the primate who in turn will commemorate the other heads of the churches. I am not very knowledgeable about protocols. To my ears it would sound better and more accurate for ECs to pray for the universal  pontiff or just for the Bishop of Rome. I went to an EC parish for years before I became Orthodox and we never said the filioque.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #166 on: March 19, 2012, 05:05:32 PM »

I can understand them EC praying for the pope, however, the choice of words could be better. I have no idea what an ecumenical pontiff is. I know that in that in some Orthodox jurisdictions we commemorate the Primate and have been told that this is not correct. (can't say whether this is true or not.) I was told that we should only be commemorating our bishop who will commemorate the primate who in turn will commemorate the other heads of the churches. I am not very knowledgeable about protocols. To my ears it would sound better and more accurate for ECs to pray for the universal  pontiff or just for the Bishop of Rome. I went to an EC parish for years before I became Orthodox and we never said the filioque.

When we last worshiped at an EC parish, it was before the Revised Divine Liturgy was put into use.  I remember that in some of the DL pew books we used back then, the filioque was blacked out.  And in some it wasn't  laugh.  Go figure!  In any event, we recited the Creed without the filioque.  I don't remember how the Pope was referred to but I'm pretty sure it sure wasn't "ecumenical pontiff".  Is that the wording from the RDL?  If so, you're right--it could be better.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 05:21:01 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #167 on: March 19, 2012, 05:22:07 PM »

"For our holy ecumenical
pontiff N., the pope of Rome, let
us pray to the Lord."

This is from the 1964/1965 translation. However, I see that they (Ruthenians) have updated it over the last few years to
"For our Holy Father,
N., the Pope of Rome, let us pray
to the Lord."

I think that is a real improvement.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #168 on: March 19, 2012, 07:06:17 PM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?

Regarding "'imposed' Latinizations", a good example to consider is Canon 209 of the CCEO.

Quote
Canon 209

1. The eparchial bishop must commemorate the Roman Pontiff

before all as a sign of full communion with him in the Divine

Liturgy and the divine praises according to the prescriptions of

the liturgical books and to see to it that it be faithfully done

by the other clergy of the eparchy. 2. The eparchial bishop

must be commemorated by all the clergy in the Divine Liturgy and

the divine praises according to the prescriptions of the liturgical books.

I hope you will all excuse my whining.

First of all, I didn't notice you were whining  Wink

Well, it was subtle.

If EC's were unwilling to commemorate him, then it seems they wouldn't be in communion with him and would, therefor, be Orthodox rather than Catholic.  I'm not saying you're wrong, just trying to understand.  Am I missing something about this?

Yes, something very significant. The canon I quoted doesn't just say that the Melkite patriarch will commemorate the Pope (which wouldn't be a latinization) but that every Melkite bishop must commemorate him. That's a latinization.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,618



« Reply #169 on: March 19, 2012, 07:19:55 PM »

Going back to the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" topic, something else I just read on catholic.com (though not the same thread as before) seems pretty relevant:

Quote from: Ghosty
As for reunion, it's hard to say what would happen. The Antiochian Patriarchate (Byzantine) already reunited with the Church of Rome, and the result was that the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate was recreated to replace it. There will likely always be some splinter group that wants to maintain separation, and they will elevate their own Patriarch if the current one reunites with Rome. It seems like a never-ending process to me. :shrug:


True.

So you agree that it's relevant?

I'm saying that what Ghosty said is true.

My understanding is that Patriarch Cyril IV had his election declared invalid in 1724 by the Ecumenical Patriarch, who installed his own rival patriarch (whether he had the authority to do that is another question). Union with Rome only happened five years later, in 1729. If I am right, then it would not be quite right to say that the remaining church of Antioch comes from a group which splintered off after union with Rome, but rather that a schism formed, and instead of eventually being healed, one group entered into union with Rome, while the other remained in Orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 07:21:08 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #170 on: March 19, 2012, 07:40:27 PM »

Going back to the "Orthodox in communion with Rome" topic, something else I just read on catholic.com (though not the same thread as before) seems pretty relevant:

Quote from: Ghosty
As for reunion, it's hard to say what would happen. The Antiochian Patriarchate (Byzantine) already reunited with the Church of Rome, and the result was that the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate was recreated to replace it. There will likely always be some splinter group that wants to maintain separation, and they will elevate their own Patriarch if the current one reunites with Rome. It seems like a never-ending process to me. :shrug:


True.

So you agree that it's relevant?

I'm saying that what Ghosty said is true.

My understanding is that Patriarch Cyril IV had his election declared invalid in 1724 by the Ecumenical Patriarch, who installed his own rival patriarch (whether he had the authority to do that is another question). Union with Rome only happened five years later, in 1729. If I am right, then it would not be quite right to say that the remaining church of Antioch comes from a group which splintered off after union with Rome, but rather that a schism formed, and instead of eventually being healed, one group entered into union with Rome, while the other remained in Orthodoxy.

I'm a little rusty on the details, but as I understand it the schism happened in such a way that both sides had about an equally good claim to having the real Patriarch of Antioch.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #171 on: March 20, 2012, 09:41:26 AM »

"For our holy ecumenical
pontiff N., the pope of Rome, let
us pray to the Lord."

This is from the 1964/1965 translation. However, I see that they (Ruthenians) have updated it over the last few years to
"For our Holy Father,
N., the Pope of Rome, let us pray
to the Lord."


I think that is a real improvement.

That's the prayer that was in our (Ruthenian) prayer books--now that I see it.  Much better than "ecumenical pontiff"! 
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #172 on: March 20, 2012, 09:48:24 AM »

I think the "imposition of Latin practices" was on a more formal, liturgical level rather than on the level of private praxis that Papist was, I believe, referring to.  Unless one is under obedience to a "spiritual father" how and where and in front of what one prays and which prayers are said, etc. is strictly between the person praying and God--provided, of course, that one is doing nothing heretical or outside of Church norms.

Actually very little was ever mandated by Rome other than celibacy outside Eastern Europe and the Middle East for Eastern Catholics.  Rome certainly encouraged others or turned their head the other way, but most of the Latinization was voluntary adoption with strong encouragement from Latin Religious Orders in the area.

Very interesting!  I never knew that.  So why, then, all the whining and criticizing of some about "imposed" Latinizations?

Regarding "'imposed' Latinizations", a good example to consider is Canon 209 of the CCEO.

Quote
Canon 209

1. The eparchial bishop must commemorate the Roman Pontiff

before all as a sign of full communion with him in the Divine

Liturgy and the divine praises according to the prescriptions of

the liturgical books and to see to it that it be faithfully done

by the other clergy of the eparchy. 2. The eparchial bishop

must be commemorated by all the clergy in the Divine Liturgy and

the divine praises according to the prescriptions of the liturgical books.

I hope you will all excuse my whining.

First of all, I didn't notice you were whining  Wink

Well, it was subtle.

If EC's were unwilling to commemorate him, then it seems they wouldn't be in communion with him and would, therefor, be Orthodox rather than Catholic.  I'm not saying you're wrong, just trying to understand.  Am I missing something about this?

Yes, something very significant. The canon I quoted doesn't just say that the Melkite patriarch will commemorate the Pope (which wouldn't be a latinization) but that every Melkite bishop must commemorate him. That's a latinization.

I see that the canon isn't particular to Melkite bishops, but refers to all EC bishops.  It may be a "latinization" but, if one is Catholic and in communion with the Pope,  is there anything particularly objectionable about it?  Why would any Catholic bishop, Eastern or Western, object to commemorating the Pope?  (Remember, the baggage I bring to the Catholic Church is quite different than that carried by long-time or cradle Catholics, EC or RC, and even Protestant converts, so I guess I'm not as "sensitive" about those kinds of things  Wink.)
« Last Edit: March 20, 2012, 09:48:46 AM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #173 on: March 20, 2012, 10:38:39 AM »

I see that the canon isn't particular to Melkite bishops, but refers to all EC bishops.  It may be a "latinization" but, if one is Catholic and in communion with the Pope,  is there anything particularly objectionable about it?  Why would any Catholic bishop, Eastern or Western, object to commemorating the Pope?  (Remember, the baggage I bring to the Catholic Church is quite different than that carried by long-time or cradle Catholics, EC or RC, and even Protestant converts, so I guess I'm not as "sensitive" about those kinds of things  Wink.)

So your argument is that it's okay because the canon requires papal commemoration in all the EC Churches?  Huh Now I think I'm missing something.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #174 on: March 20, 2012, 10:41:10 AM »

It may be a "latinization"

If it's a latinization that's imposed, doesn't that mean that it's an "imposed latinization"?

P.S. Sorry I forgot: "imposed latinization" has a negative connotation.  Lips Sealed
« Last Edit: March 20, 2012, 10:44:00 AM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #175 on: March 20, 2012, 10:44:35 AM »

I see that the canon isn't particular to Melkite bishops, but refers to all EC bishops.  It may be a "latinization" but, if one is Catholic and in communion with the Pope,  is there anything particularly objectionable about it?  Why would any Catholic bishop, Eastern or Western, object to commemorating the Pope?  (Remember, the baggage I bring to the Catholic Church is quite different than that carried by long-time or cradle Catholics, EC or RC, and even Protestant converts, so I guess I'm not as "sensitive" about those kinds of things  Wink.)

So your argument is that it's okay because the canon requires papal commemoration in all the EC Churches?  Huh Now I think I'm missing something.

Is there something objectionable about requiring papal commemoration by all *Catholic* bishops, Western or Eastern?  If so, what?  We commemorate him at every Mass I attend in the RC parish I belong to.  And when I belonged to a BC parish, we commemorated him at every DL.  I don't hear any objections now, nor did I then.  Doesn't mean there aren't those who object, mind you, but at least the BC parish we were in was pretty small, people were very talkative and opinionated and never once did we hear any grumblings about the Pope or commemorating him in the DL.  Perhaps it's different with the Melkites--I wouldn't know.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2012, 10:46:57 AM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #176 on: March 20, 2012, 10:50:18 AM »

I'm not saying you're wrong,

I always find it interesting when people use "I'm not saying you're wrong" as a lead-in to setting themselves up as the judge/jury. (I'm not saying that's you're doing.  Wink)

Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #177 on: March 20, 2012, 10:52:26 AM »

Is there something objectionable about requiring papal commemoration by all *Catholic* bishops, Western or Eastern?

Have you been reading the discussion?  Huh

 
It may be a "latinization"

If it's a latinization that's imposed, doesn't that mean that it's an "imposed latinization"?
« Last Edit: March 20, 2012, 10:53:36 AM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #178 on: March 20, 2012, 10:56:19 AM »

I'm not saying you're wrong,

I always find it interesting when people use "I'm not saying you're wrong" as a lead-in to setting themselves up as the judge/jury. (I'm not saying that's you're doing.  Wink)



So, what are your objections to having Catholic bishops of all persuasions commemorate the Pope during Mass/DL?  I ask because you seem to have some but haven't yet said what they are, other to imply that because of Canon 209 of CCEO, this is, for Eastern Catholics, an "imposed latinization", i.e., an *imposition*, and therefor something negative.  And, if it is indeed negative, how and why is it?  (And *please* don't say, going round and round in circles, "because it's 'imposed'".)

Let me put it a little differently.  My question is, irregardless of whether it is "imposed" (*forced* upon them?) or not, why would any Catholic bishop object to commemorating the Pope?  Does it somehow go against their faith or their beliefs?  If so, why would they remain *Catholic*?  Do you, as a Catholic, object to what the Church requires of you?  Does it go against your faith, your beliefs?  If so, why do you remain Catholic?
« Last Edit: March 20, 2012, 11:14:27 AM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,172


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #179 on: March 20, 2012, 10:59:02 AM »

Is there something objectionable about requiring papal commemoration by all *Catholic* bishops, Western or Eastern?

Have you been reading the discussion?  Huh

 
It may be a "latinization"

If it's a latinization that's imposed, doesn't that mean that it's an "imposed latinization"?


Well...yes, I have, as a matter of fact.  But I beg of you to cut me some slack, being old, dumb, and ignorant as I am.  I may have, probably did in fact, miss something.  So, I beg your indulgence and ask for patience, and a little assistance for some greater clarity on your part.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #180 on: March 20, 2012, 12:02:04 PM »

I suspect that the readers of this thread are getting tired of hearing from me on the issue of imposed latinizations -- I say this because I'm even getting tired of myself. Grin So I'm going to try to summarize my position in one post and not drag things out any further.

First, I agree with what Deacon Lance pointed out several days ago: many latinizations have been voluntarily adopted by the EC Churches.

Nevertheless, I also believe that the practice of every Eastern bishop commemorating the Pope is a latinization, and since it is imposed I call it an imposed latinization.

I realize some people don't want me to say "imposed latinization" because that has a negative connotation. I suppose I could instead say "mandated latinization" or "involuntary latinization", although I'm not sure if those have any less of a negative connotation.

I'm willing to listen to anyone's arguments, if they believe that it isn't a latinization or that it isn't imposed, but I don't think just saying that "imposed latinization" has a negative connotation counts as an argument.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,254


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #181 on: March 20, 2012, 01:58:46 PM »

I suspect that the readers of this thread are getting tired of hearing from me on the issue of imposed latinizations -- I say this because I'm even getting tired of myself. Grin So I'm going to try to summarize my position in one post and not drag things out any further.

First, I agree with what Deacon Lance pointed out several days ago: many latinizations have been voluntarily adopted by the EC Churches.

Nevertheless, I also believe that the practice of every Eastern bishop commemorating the Pope is a latinization, and since it is imposed I call it an imposed latinization.

I realize some people don't want me to say "imposed latinization" because that has a negative connotation. I suppose I could instead say "mandated latinization" or "involuntary latinization", although I'm not sure if those have any less of a negative connotation.

I'm willing to listen to anyone's arguments, if they believe that it isn't a latinization or that it isn't imposed, but I don't think just saying that "imposed latinization" has a negative connotation counts as an argument.
While I understand that there are truly some "latinizations" out there that need to be corrected, I don't think what you are talking about is a latinization as much as a "Catholicization". It's done to show that the particular parish is Catholic and not Eastern Orthodox.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Kra-nion
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: 'Old Faith Orthodox' { in catholic communion }
Jurisdiction: ;those to whom Sts. Cyril & Methodius went;
Posts: 16


« Reply #182 on: May 13, 2013, 07:27:43 AM »

#.... that church is full of all different types of peoples.......which one's 'opinion' are you looking for?.........'those to whom Sts. Cyril & Methodius went'[orthodox in catholic communion]'Old Faith'.................../ or the one's john paul ll  called;  1.cast off latinization  2.return to your tradition  3.be an authenic eastern wittness  4.'listen' to those to whom Sts. Cyril & Methodius went  .......then after some time he also called them........      5. Why isn't anybody doing anything?................./ or maybe it's the uncountable different latin groops starting or supporting there own selfstylled religious intrigue( i was approched by an antipope groop, sent by an outside latin entity from vat. 2 brake-a-way ).................. so? who do you want to hear from?.................
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,144



« Reply #183 on: May 13, 2013, 10:36:45 AM »

I was just re-reading the second-to-last post ...

While I understand that there are truly some "latinizations" out there that need to be corrected, I don't think what you are talking about is a latinization as much as a "Catholicization". It's done to show that the particular parish is Catholic and not Eastern Orthodox.

I guess that's a (though not the only) reasonable way to look at it.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,745


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #184 on: May 13, 2013, 12:05:11 PM »

A few thoughts after re-reading this revived thread.

The Catholic Church isn't trying to double-deal you with a claim that Greek Catholics don't have to accept some Catholic defined doctrines. It doesn't say that, because it can't. It can't be relativistic. It says that Greek Catholics for example are to accept all Catholic defined doctrines but their calling is to express them in Orthodox terms, in order to show the Orthodox it can be done and thus end the schism. The educated Orthodox on this board say it's impossible to reconcile some Catholic doctrine with Orthodoxy, which is why they're Orthodox. Believing it's possible doesn't make the Catholic Church a liar. Just wrong from your point of view.

My view is the only real difference is about the nature and scope of the papacy. Orthodox have no problem with the Pope as the head of the 'college' of patriarchs – they venerate pre-schism Popes as Popes. Catholicism and Orthodoxy agree the episcopate is of divine origin and the church is infallible. (As, for example, the Anglicans' Articles XIX and XXI teach, Protestants believe the church is fallible; liberal or conservative, in the end the individual believer decides what's right: 'what I think the Bible teaches'.) But the Orthodox see the Pope's office as just like an Orthodox patriarch's, a man-made rank. (In other words bishops are essential to the church; the papacy or the Patriarchate of Moscow, etc., are not.) Catholicism says the Pope's a unique kind of bishop; his office is a function of church infallibility under rare circumstances. There's no reconciling these positions; one side would have to give into the other, declaring the other side the true church and joining it. That's why the Greek Catholic churches exist and why online and other hardline Orthodox rail against ecumenism. Understandable when you think the true church is at stake. (And when Catholicism outnumbers you worldwide, and when Islam and Communism historically have long limited your power.)

Yet that disputed claim, because both churches claim it, also means the two churches understand each other; Protestants understand neither. When Pope Benedict XVI repeated the claim that Catholicism is the church, the mainline (old liberal) Protestant denominations and the secular humanists complained. The Russian Orthodox Church wasn't upset, because they understood him, and Russian men tend not to act like little girls.

Most born Greek Catholics, to whom the original post was addressed, don't think about and express Catholic doctrine in Orthodox terms. That's something seminary professors and crossovers from the Roman Rite who write on message boards do. The cradles think like Latin Catholics.
Logged

Cyrillic
Merarches
**********