Topic: Building Bridges Between Orthodox and Catholic Christians

[Peter J]

Come home, ACROD – I love you and miss you.

ACROD returned home.

Of course the Orthodox say that; only makes sense given your doctrine. (Like we'd say the Ukrainian Catholic Church returned.)

Not really the same. ACROD wasn't a new uniatism; it was more like getting out of the uniatist-agreement that their ancestors had accepted.

But in his dream, he would have Pope John XXIII come to my grandfather and say, "Come home, Joe." My grandfather would reply, "You go your way, Janku, I go mine!"

And that, to me, as you doubtless can imagine, is unspeakably sad.

I'd say it's mixed: definitely the leaving/pushing-out is sad (and btw I quite agree with you that our fellow churchmen were the ones to blame); but we can be joyful of the fact that nowadays (unlike 4 centuries ago) we (Catholics) don't feel the need to grab them, tear them away from Orthodoxy, and make them become Catholic.

Never heard of Interwar Poland and its "Revindication Campaigns" I see.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volhynia_Experiment#Cancellation_of_the_Volhynia_Experiment

More examples from then to "nowadays" could be provided, but the point that we don't have to reach back a century, let alone 4, to make that point suffices.

Alright. I was just talking about our lack of proselytizing post-Vatican II.

And I was just talking about your lack of a lack of proselytizing post-Vatican II, though the specific example I gave predates it a little.

I've been meaning to ask you about that, actually. I know you can point to the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, but is there a link you can provide regarding their activities nowadays (post-Vatican II, at least) vis-a-vis proselytizing of Orthodox Christians?

[Peter J]

Tear them away from Orthodoxy, and you make them non-Catholic.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with all those semantics. (Of course I could have said "become Eastern Catholic" but I don't think you would like that any better.)

Catholic is Catholic, East or West(ern Rite Orthodox).

I'll give you an A for effort, but just try asking Eastern Orthodox "Are you an Eastern Catholic?" (without telling them why you're asking) and see how many yeses you get.

[The young fogey]

Tear them away from Orthodoxy, and you make them non-Catholic.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with all those semantics. (Of course I could have said "become Eastern Catholic" but I don't think you would like that any better.)

Catholic is Catholic, East or West(ern Rite Orthodox).

I'll give you an A for effort, but just try asking Eastern Orthodox "Are you an Eastern Catholic?" (without telling them why you're asking) and see how many yeses you get.

Exactly.

Thanks for the reminder that the local reactions to the Union of Brest-Litovsk were far from unanimous. The point remains that to Catholics the union was a return, as the Orthodox see the founding of ACROD.

[Peter J]

Thanks for the reminder that the local reactions to the Union of Brest-Litovsk were far from unanimous. The point remains that to those Catholics who use shamelessly polemical semantics the union was a return,

Fixed that for you.

[The young fogey]

Cute. Everybody who reads me knows I'm a 100% believer in giving never-Catholic Orthodox the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging such people's apostolic authority as an estranged part of the Catholic Church, a step beyond recognition of orders, and that I've never made excuses for John Ireland and other Catholic churchmen who actually started the schisms in America. I'm not some caricature Catholic preaching the Feeneyite line (if you're not officially Catholic you're going to hell; allowable opinion, not doctrine) and trolling for individual converts from the Orthodox or even new unias. That said, because of Catholicism's true-church claim, it accepts such conversions, individual and group, and yes, sees them as a return.

[ialmisry]

Cute. Everybody who reads me knows I'm a 100% believer in giving never-Catholic Orthodox the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging such people's apostolic authority as an estranged part of the Catholic Church, a step beyond recognition of orders, and that I've never made excuses for John Ireland and other Catholic churchmen who actually started the schisms in America. I'm not some caricature Catholic preaching the Feeneyite line (if you're not officially Catholic you're going to hell; allowable opinion, not doctrine) and trolling for individual converts from the Orthodox or even new unias. That said, because of Catholicism's true-church claim, it accepts such conversions, individual and group, and yes, sees them as a return.

I take it that by "Catholicism," you meant the Vatican.

And we should concern ourselves about how heretics see anything why again?

[ialmisry]

Tear them away from Orthodoxy, and you make them non-Catholic.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with all those semantics. (Of course I could have said "become Eastern Catholic" but I don't think you would like that any better.)

Catholic is Catholic, East or West(ern Rite Orthodox).

I'll give you an A for effort, but just try asking Eastern Orthodox "Are you an Eastern Catholic?" (without telling them why you're asking) and see how many yeses you get.

I only take polls from among the informed. So I would get 100% yeses.

[The young fogey]

Cute. Everybody who reads me knows I'm a 100% believer in giving never-Catholic Orthodox the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging such people's apostolic authority as an estranged part of the Catholic Church, a step beyond recognition of orders, and that I've never made excuses for John Ireland and other Catholic churchmen who actually started the schisms in America. I'm not some caricature Catholic preaching the Feeneyite line (if you're not officially Catholic you're going to hell; allowable opinion, not doctrine) and trolling for individual converts from the Orthodox or even new unias. That said, because of Catholicism's true-church claim, it accepts such conversions, individual and group, and yes, sees them as a return.

I take it that by "Catholicism," you meant the Vatican.

And we should concern ourselves about how heretics see anything why again?

Fine, then don't read my posts and be happy.

[TheTrisagion]

This is what happens every time isalmisry enters a thread.

[Peter J]

Cute. Everybody who reads me knows I'm a 100% believer in giving never-Catholic Orthodox the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging such people's apostolic authority as an estranged part of the Catholic Church, a step beyond recognition of orders, and that I've never made excuses for John Ireland and other Catholic churchmen who actually started the schisms in America. I'm not some caricature Catholic preaching the Feeneyite line (if you're not officially Catholic you're going to hell; allowable opinion, not doctrine) and trolling for individual converts from the Orthodox or even new unias. That said, because of Catholicism's true-church claim, it accepts such conversions, individual and group, and yes, sees them as a return.

I take it that by "Catholicism," you meant the Vatican.

  I don't think I've ever known TYF to say "Catholicism" if he meant the Vatican.

[Peter J]

Tear them away from Orthodoxy, and you make them non-Catholic.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with all those semantics. (Of course I could have said "become Eastern Catholic" but I don't think you would like that any better.)

Catholic is Catholic, East or West(ern Rite Orthodox).

I'll give you an A for effort, but just try asking Eastern Orthodox "Are you an Eastern Catholic?" (without telling them why you're asking) and see how many yeses you get.

I only take polls from among the informed. So I would get 100% yeses.

Conclusion: either you're living in a fantasy, or you missed where I said without telling them why you're asking.

[mike]

Isa, stop this semantics trolling.

[The young fogey]

Cute. Everybody who reads me knows I'm a 100% believer in giving never-Catholic Orthodox the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging such people's apostolic authority as an estranged part of the Catholic Church, a step beyond recognition of orders, and that I've never made excuses for John Ireland and other Catholic churchmen who actually started the schisms in America. I'm not some caricature Catholic preaching the Feeneyite line (if you're not officially Catholic you're going to hell; allowable opinion, not doctrine) and trolling for individual converts from the Orthodox or even new unias. That said, because of Catholicism's true-church claim, it accepts such conversions, individual and group, and yes, sees them as a return.

I take it that by "Catholicism," you meant the Vatican.

  I don't think I've ever known TYF to say "Catholicism" if he meant the Vatican.

Isa's right that I mean Catholicism as commonly understood, under the Pope of Rome. 'The Vatican' is a common synecdoche for the Catholic Church but it's historically inaccurate (in the Middle Ages it wasn't the Pope's Rome HQ; St Peter's isn't a cathedral) and I don't use it because I'm not ultramontanist; Catholics don't have to be (the last Pope wasn't).

[Peter J]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

[The young fogey]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

Yes, and there's the tactic that Catholic liberals take when they promote the popular opinions of American Catholics that agree with secular culture, not the church, vs. the teachings of the church, which they label 'the Vatican', trying to say real Catholicism and the Vatican are different.

[ialmisry]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

Yes, and there's the tactic that Catholic liberals take when they promote the popular opinions of American Catholics that agree with secular culture, not the church, vs. the teachings of the church, which they label 'the Vatican', trying to say real Catholicism and the Vatican are different.

well, that's one of the two times that broken clock of the "Liberal Catholics" is right.  Now if they could just stop identifying their own beliefs as real Catholicism.

[ialmisry]

Cute. Everybody who reads me knows I'm a 100% believer in giving never-Catholic Orthodox the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging such people's apostolic authority as an estranged part of the Catholic Church, a step beyond recognition of orders, and that I've never made excuses for John Ireland and other Catholic churchmen who actually started the schisms in America. I'm not some caricature Catholic preaching the Feeneyite line (if you're not officially Catholic you're going to hell; allowable opinion, not doctrine) and trolling for individual converts from the Orthodox or even new unias. That said, because of Catholicism's true-church claim, it accepts such conversions, individual and group, and yes, sees them as a return.

I take it that by "Catholicism," you meant the Vatican.

  I don't think I've ever known TYF to say "Catholicism" if he meant the Vatican.

Isa's right

Of course.

that I mean Catholicism as commonly understood, under the Pope of Rome.

"Commonly understood" by whom?

'The Vatican' is a common synecdoche for the Catholic Church but it's historically inaccurate (in the Middle Ages it wasn't the Pope's Rome HQ; St Peter's isn't a cathedral)

and they were in Avignon-or do you prefer Pisa?

and I don't use it because I'm not ultramontanist; Catholics don't have to be (the last Pope wasn't).

his attempted abolition of the Patriarchate of the West says otherwise.

[ialmisry]

Tear them away from Orthodoxy, and you make them non-Catholic.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with all those semantics. (Of course I could have said "become Eastern Catholic" but I don't think you would like that any better.)

Catholic is Catholic, East or West(ern Rite Orthodox).

I'll give you an A for effort, but just try asking Eastern Orthodox "Are you an Eastern Catholic?" (without telling them why you're asking) and see how many yeses you get.

I only take polls from among the informed. So I would get 100% yeses.

Conclusion: either you're living in a fantasy, or you missed where I said without telling them why you're asking.

I shouldn't have to tell them what I'm asking.

If I ask any Antiochian if he is كاثوليكي شرقي, he will say no.

Here is a recent article on the first Orthodox Catechism in English, done by an American but published at London:
http://orthodoxhistory.org/2013/06/25/an-unexpected-discovery-concerning-philip-ludwell-iii/

Here's its title page.

[ialmisry]

Cute. Everybody who reads me knows I'm a 100% believer in giving never-Catholic Orthodox the benefit of the doubt and acknowledging such people's apostolic authority as an estranged part of the Catholic Church, a step beyond recognition of orders, and that I've never made excuses for John Ireland and other Catholic churchmen who actually started the schisms in America. I'm not some caricature Catholic preaching the Feeneyite line (if you're not officially Catholic you're going to hell; allowable opinion, not doctrine) and trolling for individual converts from the Orthodox or even new unias. That said, because of Catholicism's true-church claim, it accepts such conversions, individual and group, and yes, sees them as a return.

I take it that by "Catholicism," you meant the Vatican.

And we should concern ourselves about how heretics see anything why again?

Fine, then don't read my posts and be happy.

This is what happens every time isalmisry enters a thread.

[augustin717]

In my home region the peasants would call the Catholics simply Hungarians. Their church Hungarian church their Easter Hungarian Easter their priest Hungarian "popA". Catholic was a foggy term to the older generations.

[xariskai]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

Yes, and there's the tactic that Catholic liberals take when they promote the popular opinions of American Catholics that agree with secular culture, not the church, vs. the teachings of the church, which they label 'the Vatican', trying to say real Catholicism and the Vatican are different.

Most Orthodox Christians have for centuries regarded "real Catholicism" (which we affirm of ourselves e.g. when we recite the Nicene Creed) and Vatican teaching as different, but we don't think of this as a "tactic," just a basic conviction.

[Peter J]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

Yes, and there's the tactic that Catholic liberals take when they promote the popular opinions of American Catholics that agree with secular culture, not the church, vs. the teachings of the church, which they label 'the Vatican', trying to say real Catholicism and the Vatican are different.

Most Orthodox Christians have for centuries regarded "real Catholicism" (which we affirm of ourselves e.g. when we recite the Nicene Creed) and Vatican teaching as different, but we don't think of this as a "tactic," just a basic conviction.

That's certainly understandable. However, even those of us in communion with the Vatican don't regard the Vatican as the entire Catholic Church. (I'm part of the Catholic Church, but not part of the Vatican.)

[Peter J]

Tear them away from Orthodoxy, and you make them non-Catholic.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with all those semantics. (Of course I could have said "become Eastern Catholic" but I don't think you would like that any better.)

Catholic is Catholic, East or West(ern Rite Orthodox).

I'll give you an A for effort, but just try asking Eastern Orthodox "Are you an Eastern Catholic?" (without telling them why you're asking) and see how many yeses you get.

I only take polls from among the informed. So I would get 100% yeses.

Conclusion: either you're living in a fantasy, or you missed where I said without telling them why you're asking.

I shouldn't have to tell them what I'm asking.

I wonder if you noticed the use of the phrase "Eastern Catholic" in the description of this forum ... hopefully you weren't taking a sip of coffee at the time.

Unrelated question: when did your posts pass 30,000? I thought the earth would shake or something if someone did that.

[xariskai]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

Yes, and there's the tactic that Catholic liberals take when they promote the popular opinions of American Catholics that agree with secular culture, not the church, vs. the teachings of the church, which they label 'the Vatican', trying to say real Catholicism and the Vatican are different.

Most Orthodox Christians have for centuries regarded "real Catholicism" (which we affirm of ourselves e.g. when we recite the Nicene Creed) and Vatican teaching as different, but we don't think of this as a "tactic," just a basic conviction.

That's certainly understandable. However, even those of us in communion with the Vatican don't regard the Vatican as the entire Catholic Church. (I'm part of the Catholic Church, but not part of the Vatican.)

Sure, but that's not an Orthodox perspective.

[ialmisry]

In my home region the peasants would call the Catholics simply Hungarians. Their church Hungarian church their Easter Hungarian Easter their priest Hungarian "popA". Catholic was a foggy term to the older generations.

It is interesting-telling-that the "Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic" now confesses its faith "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," while the Romanian Orthodox Church continues to confess the Faith "întru una, sfântă, sobornicească și apostolească Biserică."

On that note, on the issue of post Vatican II attempts to prey on the Orthodox, I would count the appearance of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" in Romanian a year after its first appearance, years before its appearance in English:although very few of the Vatican's flock in Romania speak Romanian. I saw stacks of them in its main cathedral in Bucharest, where everything was in Hungarian.  And  it wasn't teaching the "Orthodox Confession of the Catholic and Apostolic Eastern Church."

[Alveus Lacuna]

I noticed someone on the Young Fogey's blog called becoming Orthodox in America "demographic suicide". Funny and pretty true.

[The young fogey]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

Yes, and there's the tactic that Catholic liberals take when they promote the popular opinions of American Catholics that agree with secular culture, not the church, vs. the teachings of the church, which they label 'the Vatican', trying to say real Catholicism and the Vatican are different.

Most Orthodox Christians have for centuries regarded "real Catholicism" (which we affirm of ourselves e.g. when we recite the Nicene Creed) and Vatican teaching as different, but we don't think of this as a "tactic," just a basic conviction.

That's certainly understandable. However, even those of us in communion with the Vatican don't regard the Vatican as the entire Catholic Church. (I'm part of the Catholic Church, but not part of the Vatican.)

Right.

[stanley123]

In my home region the peasants would call the Catholics simply Hungarians. Their church Hungarian church their Easter Hungarian Easter their priest Hungarian "popA". Catholic was a foggy term to the older generations.

It is interesting-telling-that the "Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic" now confesses its faith "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," while the Romanian Orthodox Church continues to confess the Faith "întru una, sfântă, sobornicească și apostolească Biserică."

On that note, on the issue of post Vatican II attempts to prey on the Orthodox, I would count the appearance of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" in Romanian a year after its first appearance, years before its appearance in English:although very few of the Vatican's flock in Romania speak Romanian. I saw stacks of them in its main cathedral in Bucharest, where everything was in Hungarian.  And  it wasn't teaching the "Orthodox Confession of the Catholic and Apostolic Eastern Church."

They have Masses in both Romanian and Hungarian and sometimes even in Latin. the words "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," are in the Romanian language so there are Roman Catholics and Greek Catholics who speak Romanian. 

[ialmisry]

In my home region the peasants would call the Catholics simply Hungarians. Their church Hungarian church their Easter Hungarian Easter their priest Hungarian "popA". Catholic was a foggy term to the older generations.

It is interesting-telling-that the "Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic" now confesses its faith "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," while the Romanian Orthodox Church continues to confess the Faith "întru una, sfântă, sobornicească și apostolească Biserică."

On that note, on the issue of post Vatican II attempts to prey on the Orthodox, I would count the appearance of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" in Romanian a year after its first appearance, years before its appearance in English:although very few of the Vatican's flock in Romania speak Romanian. I saw stacks of them in its main cathedral in Bucharest, where everything was in Hungarian.  And  it wasn't teaching the "Orthodox Confession of the Catholic and Apostolic Eastern Church."

They have Masses in both Romanian and Hungarian and sometimes even in Latin. the words "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," are in the Romanian language so there are Roman Catholics and Greek Catholics who speak Romanian. 

The "Roman Catholics" outnumber the "Greek Catholics" in Romania, no matter who is counting, and both together are dwarfed by the nearly 90% Orthodox majority.

Of those under the Vatican in Romania, most are Hungarian-hence why all the books I saw (except the CCC) in the Cathedral were in Hungarian (some announcements on the board were German and Romanian).

In contrast, the US alone has enough followers of the Vatican who speak English twice the total population of all Romania.  Those in Great Britain are many times those in Romania, as are those in Ireland, and in Australia, and those in New Zealand are almost equal.  Their Anglo coreligionists in Canada dwarf those in Romania, almost by the power of 10.

IOW, there was a larger need, and a higher priority, to translate and distribute it in English, than in Romanian, if pastoral concerns lay behind it.

[The young fogey]

Among the few Romanians I've met is a man whose family switched from Greek Catholic to Roman Catholic rather than obey the Communist order to become Orthodox.

[William]

I noticed someone on the Young Fogey's blog called becoming Orthodox in America "demographic suicide". Funny and pretty true.

I've finally found out what became of that Ochlophobist character (he posted some pseudosociological critique of Orthodoxy in the comments), so there's that.

[ialmisry]

Yes, although I was unfamiliar with the word "synecdoche" until you mentioned it. The commentary I had in mind is that saying "Catholicism" when you really meant "the Vatican" would be like saying "the family" when you really meant "the godfather".

Yes, and there's the tactic that Catholic liberals take when they promote the popular opinions of American Catholics that agree with secular culture, not the church, vs. the teachings of the church, which they label 'the Vatican', trying to say real Catholicism and the Vatican are different.

Most Orthodox Christians have for centuries regarded "real Catholicism" (which we affirm of ourselves e.g. when we recite the Nicene Creed) and Vatican teaching as different, but we don't think of this as a "tactic," just a basic conviction.

That's certainly understandable. However, even those of us in communion with the Vatican don't regard the Vatican as the entire Catholic Church. (I'm part of the Catholic Church, but not part of the Vatican.)

Right.

TITLE III THE SUPREME AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH
c. 42
Just as, by the Lord's decision, Saint Peter and the other Apostles constitute one college, so in a similar way the Roman Pontiff, successor of Peter, and the bishops, successors of the Apostles, are joined together.
c. 43
The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office (munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise.
c. 45
The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office (munus), not only has power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both strengthened and safeguarded.
The Roman Pontiff, in fulfilling the office (munus) of the supreme pastor of the Church is always united in communion with the other bishops and with the entire Church; however, he has the right, according to the needs of the Church, to determine the manner, either personal or collegial, of exercising this function.
There is neither appeal nor recourse against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff.
c. 46.1
In exercising his office (munus) the Roman Pontiff is assisted by the bishops who aid him in various ways and among these is the synod of bishops; moreover the cardinals, the Roman curia, pontifical legates and other persons and various institutes assist him according to the needs of the times; all these persons and institutes carry out the task committed to them in his name and by his authority for the good of all the Churches, according to the norm of law established by the Roman Pontiff himself.
c. 48
In this Code the term "Apostolic See" or "Holy See" applies not only to the Roman Pontiff but also, unless it is otherwise prescribed by the law or the nature of the matter indicates otherwise, dicasteries and other institutes of the Roman curia.

TITLE IV THE PATRIARCHAL CHURCHES
c. 56
A patriarch is a bishop who enjoys power over all bishops including metropolitans and other Christian faithful of the Church over which he presides according to the norm of law approved by the supreme authority of the Church.
c. 57
The erection, restoration, modification and suppression of patriarchal Churches is reserved to the supreme authority of the Church.
Only the supreme authority of the Church can modify the legitimately recognized or conceded title of each patriarchal Church.
If it is possible, a patriarchal Church must have a permanent see for the residence of the patriarch in a principal city inside its own territory from which the patriarch takes his title; this see cannot be transferred except for a most grave reason and with the consent of the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church and the assent of the Roman Pontiff.
c. 85
For a serious reason, with the consent of the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church and having consulted the Apostolic See, the patriarch can establish provinces and eparchies, modify their boundaries, unite, divide, suppress, and modify their hierarchical status and transfer the eparchial see.

TITLE VII EPARCHIES AND BISHOPS
c. 177
1. An eparchy is a portion of the people of God which is entrusted for pastoral care to a bishop with the cooperation of the presbyterate so that, adhering to its pastor and gathered by him in the Holy Spirit through the Gospel and the Eucharist, it constitutes a particular Church in which the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ is truly present and operative.
In the erection, modification, and suppression of eparchies within the territorial boundaries of a patriarchal Church, can. 85, 1 is to be observed; in other cases the erection, modification and suppression of eparchies is solely within the competence of the Apostolic See.

Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium

[ialmisry]

Among the few Romanians I've met is a man whose family switched from Greek Catholic to Roman Catholic rather than obey the Communist order to become Orthodox.

Was that a confession of the complicity of the "Roman Catholics" with the Communists?

[ialmisry]

I noticed someone on the Young Fogey's blog called becoming Orthodox in America "demographic suicide". Funny and pretty true.

I've finally found out what became of that Ochlophobist character (he posted some pseudosociological critique of Orthodoxy in the comments), so there's that.

Oh?  What did he have to say?

[William]

I noticed someone on the Young Fogey's blog called becoming Orthodox in America "demographic suicide". Funny and pretty true.

I've finally found out what became of that Ochlophobist character (he posted some pseudosociological critique of Orthodoxy in the comments), so there's that.

Oh?  What did he have to say?

http://sergesblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/next-big-things-that-werent-and-arent.html?showComment=1368807960585#c9039053299719987417

[Peter J]

Among the few Romanians I've met is a man whose family switched from Greek Catholic to Roman Catholic rather than obey the Communist order to become Orthodox.

Was that a confession of the complicity of the "Roman Catholics" with the Communists?

Very funny.

[ialmisry]

I noticed someone on the Young Fogey's blog called becoming Orthodox in America "demographic suicide". Funny and pretty true.

I've finally found out what became of that Ochlophobist character (he posted some pseudosociological critique of Orthodoxy in the comments), so there's that.

Oh?  What did he have to say?

http://sergesblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/next-big-things-that-werent-and-arent.html?showComment=1368807960585#c9039053299719987417

Ah, yes.  That prattle.  I wonder if he (or the many others I have seen prattling it in Vatican triumphalism) have ever bothered to try their pseudosociological skills on the collapse of their team in South America, the bulk of the Vatican's following-to which the election of their supreme pontiff Francis gave the tip of the hat.

[The young fogey]

I noticed someone on the Young Fogey's blog called becoming Orthodox in America "demographic suicide". Funny and pretty true.

I've finally found out what became of that Ochlophobist character (he posted some pseudosociological critique of Orthodoxy in the comments), so there's that.

Oh?  What did he have to say?

http://sergesblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/next-big-things-that-werent-and-arent.html?showComment=1368807960585#c9039053299719987417

Ah, yes.  That prattle.  I wonder if he (or the many others I have seen prattling it in Vatican triumphalism) have ever bothered to try their pseudosociological skills on the collapse of their team in South America, the bulk of the Vatican's following-to which the election of their supreme pontiff Francis gave the tip of the hat.

Whatever Mr. White's historical differences with me, I can tell you he is anything but a dumb Catholic rah-rah.

[TheTrisagion]

•American Eastern Orthodox converts. Owen White called this. The boomlet’s over. In the end you’ll see a couple more Western whites there but mostly continued stolid decline (as Bill Tighe says of their cousins the little PNCC) with most of the few converts remaining people like Tom Hanks, basically nothingarians (ex-Catholics and ex-Protestants) who marry into it (yep, the plot of My Big Fat Greek Wedding), which is great for them. A folk Catholicism that should reteach the official church a few things; now that’s good ecumenism.

I am interested to hear what basis this opinion is founded on.  I have quite a few Orthodox and Catholic friends and far more Orthodox are converts than Catholics. The Orthodox seem to be much more hyper about their beliefs than Catholics are. (whether that is a good or bad thing is up for debate, I suppose). I only know of one person who "married into" Orthodoxy and I know several who married into Catholicism.

I'm not saying they are all joining for good reasons.  I know some join because it is a "Popeless" Catholicism, but that doesn't take away the fact that there seems to be little evidence of a "stolid decline".

[The young fogey]

•American Eastern Orthodox converts. Owen White called this. The boomlet’s over. In the end you’ll see a couple more Western whites there but mostly continued stolid decline (as Bill Tighe says of their cousins the little PNCC) with most of the few converts remaining people like Tom Hanks, basically nothingarians (ex-Catholics and ex-Protestants) who marry into it (yep, the plot of My Big Fat Greek Wedding), which is great for them. A folk Catholicism that should reteach the official church a few things; now that’s good ecumenism.

I am interested to hear what basis this opinion is founded on.  I have quite a few Orthodox and Catholic friends and far more Orthodox are converts than Catholics. The Orthodox seem to be much more hyper about their beliefs than Catholics are. (whether that is a good or bad thing is up for debate, I suppose). I only know of one person who "married into" Orthodoxy and I know several who married into Catholicism.

I'm not saying they are all joining for good reasons.  I know some join because it is a "Popeless" Catholicism, but that doesn't take away the fact that there seems to be little evidence of a "stolid decline".

They're more noticeable because they're big fish in a shrinking pond.

[Romaios]

In my home region the peasants would call the Catholics simply Hungarians. Their church Hungarian church their Easter Hungarian Easter their priest Hungarian "popA". Catholic was a foggy term to the older generations.

It is interesting-telling-that the "Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic" now confesses its faith "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," while the Romanian Orthodox Church continues to confess the Faith "întru una, sfântă, sobornicească și apostolească Biserică."

On that note, on the issue of post Vatican II attempts to prey on the Orthodox, I would count the appearance of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" in Romanian a year after its first appearance, years before its appearance in English:although very few of the Vatican's flock in Romania speak Romanian. I saw stacks of them in its main cathedral in Bucharest, where everything was in Hungarian.  And  it wasn't teaching the "Orthodox Confession of the Catholic and Apostolic Eastern Church."

They have Masses in both Romanian and Hungarian and sometimes even in Latin. the words "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," are in the Romanian language so there are Roman Catholics and Greek Catholics who speak Romanian. 

The "Roman Catholics" outnumber the "Greek Catholics" in Romania, no matter who is counting, and both together are dwarfed by the nearly 90% Orthodox majority.

Of those under the Vatican in Romania, most are Hungarian-hence why all the books I saw (except the CCC) in the Cathedral were in Hungarian (some announcements on the board were German and Romanian).

IOW, there was a larger need, and a higher priority, to translate and distribute it in English, than in Romanian, if pastoral concerns lay behind it.

Actually, the part about the translation of the CCC is not accurate. I happen to know who did it: it's the work of two eminent classicist ladies from Bucharest, Francisca Băltăceanu and Monica Broșteanu (the latter is also an Arabist). Ms. Băltăceanu's mother converted to Roman-Catholicism before the Communist era, while listening to the RC Archbishop of Bucharest's lectures on Aquinas (Mgr. Anton Durcovici, who died in prison as a martyr for his faith).

They were involved in translating the RC liturgical books into Romanian prior to the Revolution of 1989 and did a very good job of that, although they couldn't be officially printed and only some type-written copies were smuggled to the RC parishes with Romanian speaking faithful. The Communists strictly forbade the use of Romanian in RC services, even though the RC's of Moldavia (the Diocese of Iasi, but also Bucharest) were primarily Romanian speaking. Because of this, the liturgical developments of Vatican II arrived somewhat later in Romania. They also translated the acts of the V2 Council and printed them in Hungary, quite early on.       

The current RC liturgical translations departed from their version and style, being done by amateur linguists and heavily latinized (or rather italienized).     

[TheTrisagion]

•American Eastern Orthodox converts. Owen White called this. The boomlet’s over. In the end you’ll see a couple more Western whites there but mostly continued stolid decline (as Bill Tighe says of their cousins the little PNCC) with most of the few converts remaining people like Tom Hanks, basically nothingarians (ex-Catholics and ex-Protestants) who marry into it (yep, the plot of My Big Fat Greek Wedding), which is great for them. A folk Catholicism that should reteach the official church a few things; now that’s good ecumenism.

I am interested to hear what basis this opinion is founded on.  I have quite a few Orthodox and Catholic friends and far more Orthodox are converts than Catholics. The Orthodox seem to be much more hyper about their beliefs than Catholics are. (whether that is a good or bad thing is up for debate, I suppose). I only know of one person who "married into" Orthodoxy and I know several who married into Catholicism.

I'm not saying they are all joining for good reasons.  I know some join because it is a "Popeless" Catholicism, but that doesn't take away the fact that there seems to be little evidence of a "stolid decline".

They're more noticeable because they're big fish in a shrinking pond.

Are you saying there are fewer Orthodox now than there were in the 90's?  I haven't seen any indication that that is true...  Where are you getting that info from?

[The young fogey]

•American Eastern Orthodox converts. Owen White called this. The boomlet’s over. In the end you’ll see a couple more Western whites there but mostly continued stolid decline (as Bill Tighe says of their cousins the little PNCC) with most of the few converts remaining people like Tom Hanks, basically nothingarians (ex-Catholics and ex-Protestants) who marry into it (yep, the plot of My Big Fat Greek Wedding), which is great for them. A folk Catholicism that should reteach the official church a few things; now that’s good ecumenism.

I am interested to hear what basis this opinion is founded on.  I have quite a few Orthodox and Catholic friends and far more Orthodox are converts than Catholics. The Orthodox seem to be much more hyper about their beliefs than Catholics are. (whether that is a good or bad thing is up for debate, I suppose). I only know of one person who "married into" Orthodoxy and I know several who married into Catholicism.

I'm not saying they are all joining for good reasons.  I know some join because it is a "Popeless" Catholicism, but that doesn't take away the fact that there seems to be little evidence of a "stolid decline".

They're more noticeable because they're big fish in a shrinking pond.

Are you saying there are fewer Orthodox now than there were in the 90's?  I haven't seen any indication that that is true...  Where are you getting that info from?

No numbers (yet?) but the phenomenon is well known, as is the official Orthodox exaggeration of their numbers.

[ialmisry]

In my home region the peasants would call the Catholics simply Hungarians. Their church Hungarian church their Easter Hungarian Easter their priest Hungarian "popA". Catholic was a foggy term to the older generations.

It is interesting-telling-that the "Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic" now confesses its faith "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," while the Romanian Orthodox Church continues to confess the Faith "întru una, sfântă, sobornicească și apostolească Biserică."

On that note, on the issue of post Vatican II attempts to prey on the Orthodox, I would count the appearance of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" in Romanian a year after its first appearance, years before its appearance in English:although very few of the Vatican's flock in Romania speak Romanian. I saw stacks of them in its main cathedral in Bucharest, where everything was in Hungarian.  And  it wasn't teaching the "Orthodox Confession of the Catholic and Apostolic Eastern Church."

They have Masses in both Romanian and Hungarian and sometimes even in Latin. the words "Într-una, sfântă, catolică și apostolică Biserică," are in the Romanian language so there are Roman Catholics and Greek Catholics who speak Romanian. 

The "Roman Catholics" outnumber the "Greek Catholics" in Romania, no matter who is counting, and both together are dwarfed by the nearly 90% Orthodox majority.

Of those under the Vatican in Romania, most are Hungarian-hence why all the books I saw (except the CCC) in the Cathedral were in Hungarian (some announcements on the board were German and Romanian).

IOW, there was a larger need, and a higher priority, to translate and distribute it in English, than in Romanian, if pastoral concerns lay behind it.

Actually, the part about the translation of the CCC is not accurate.

what is inaccurate about it?

[ialmisry]

I noticed someone on the Young Fogey's blog called becoming Orthodox in America "demographic suicide". Funny and pretty true.

I've finally found out what became of that Ochlophobist character (he posted some pseudosociological critique of Orthodoxy in the comments), so there's that.

Oh?  What did he have to say?

http://sergesblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/next-big-things-that-werent-and-arent.html?showComment=1368807960585#c9039053299719987417

Ah, yes.  That prattle.  I wonder if he (or the many others I have seen prattling it in Vatican triumphalism) have ever bothered to try their pseudosociological skills on the collapse of their team in South America, the bulk of the Vatican's following-to which the election of their supreme pontiff Francis gave the tip of the hat.

Whatever Mr. White's historical differences with me, I can tell you he is anything but a dumb Catholic rah-rah.

yes, he is a smart Vatican rah-rah.  With a Marxist tint, IIRC.