Bojan, as an Eastern Catholic I appreciate your neutral and factual answer. The level of latinizations vary wildly from Eparchy to Eparchy, parish to parish, priest to priest, and layperson to layperson.
@HolyHammerOfByzantium False. All Catholics regardless of Sui Juris accepts ALL Catholic doctrine including the Papacy. The Pope has universal jurisdiction unhindered. If you believe otherwise, you're not Catholic. He simply isn't head of our local Church, be he is on the universal level just like for Roman Catholics.
Thank you Bojan for the video. I am an Eastern Catholic, or more technically I am a member of an Eastern Catholic parish, and I appreciate your video. Far too often, I see certain Orthodox people calling Eastern Catholics vile names. Sadly, forced conversions happened at various times and places, and both sides are guilty. I know exactly what you are talking about regarding the iconostasis. Many Greek Orthodox churches in the US are of the same style. Thankfully, my church has a full iconostasis. Also, I'm pretty sure that we do not freeze our prosphora, but I cannot speak for every church.
@@universalistsnape8584 Yes. There are some eastern Christians who are in communion with Rome and some that are not. Those who are in communion with Rome are Eastern Catholics, and those who are not are Eastern Orthodox. Some Eastern Catholics follow the Byzantine Rite. Those are Byzantine Catholics. Other Eastern Catholics are from different rites, such as Armenian, Coptic, and Syriac.
@@universalistsnape8584 Churches that can celebrate the Eucharist or communion together. Further, they believe each church is valid and have the same theology.
Regarding catholic dogmas, one of my eastern catholic friends basically said that the bare minimum is to believe that they are not heretical. They do not use the filioque, but they do not consider it to be heretical. Also, yeah it's pretty easy to tell if a church is eastern Catholic by the iconostasis. My guess for why is because most of these iconostases were built in the 60s and 70s, so apart from usually (but not always) being reduced, they are usually built with an almost art deco, art nouveau style. If it looks like Tolkien designed it, it's eastern catholic.
@@rustybeltway2373 And in other places in NE PA, not to mention other places and states, the (Ruthenian) bishop took the iconostases out completely. I was there in a church where that happened, and it wasn't the only one by any means.
Adding some nuance: the Melkite patriarch, for example, refused to subscribe to the decree of papal infallibility. When pressured to do so, he added a codicil, "saving all the rights and privileges of the patriarchs." In 1995 the vast majority of the Melkite Greek Catholic bishops signed the following statement: “Profession of Faith “1. I believe everything which Eastern Orthodoxy teaches. “2. I am in communion with the Bishop of Rome as the first among the bishops, according to the limits recognized by the Holy Fathers of the East during the first millennium, before the separation."
That's fine and dandy for the Melkite Patriarch to say, but the de jure fact is that the Pope has complete and total power over them like every other Catholic
I have been to Melkite Churches and I know wonderful people of the Melkite Church and I am Orthodox and I can tell you that they are more adherent to Orthodoxy than most Orthodox in America. I love Orthodoxy because of the Patriarchs being equal. If we focused on collegiality more we would do even better. Go out to the Vortex and other strict Roman Catholic Channels on You Tube and you will see much harsher opinions of Catholic Bishops from their own people than we Orthodox have of them. The Orthodox need to stand firm on what we do and lovingly welcome these good people into our faith after they have had enough of their bishops. Papal infallibility is a very recent 19th Century innovation that is nonsense. The primacy of the Ecumenical Counsels in Orthodoxy is wonderful and has prevented idiotic changes that weaken the faith and sacrilegiously cheapen the Holy Liturgy. I was Catholic and I came into Orthodoxy and converted with joy. I actually went back to my roots by coming to Orthodoxy and it's wonderful Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom that I grew up with before the innovations that wrecked everything.
That was the Zoghby Initiative spearheaded by Archbishop Elias Zoghby. The Initiative tried to allow inter-communion between the Melkite Greek Catholic Church and the Antiochian Orthodox Church. This goal can find its roots in that the Melkite Church once had, or at the very least considered itself in, dual communion with both Rome and Constantinople. In 1724, a schism split the Melkite Church into the Melkite Greek Catholic Church and the Antiochian Orthodox Church, and Archbishop Elias and many Melkites considered the latter as their sister church. That's the context, but back to the Initiative. The Initiative tried to bring unity to the two churches. The Initiative, however, was not accepted by the Catholic nor Orthodox Church. The Antiochian Orthodox Church stated that "our Synod believes that inter-communion cannot be separated from the unity of faith. Moreover, inter-communion is the last step in the quest for unity and not the first." Source: bit.ly/3dwcgmh The response from Rome, which I should note was never officially published but was shared by Bishop Nicholas Samra and later made public, stated that it is necessary that "the sharing of the contents of dialogue not be limited solely to the two direct interlocutors [dialogists]... but that it should also implicate the wider Confessions with which the two Patriarchates are in full communion: the Catholic Communion... and the Orthodox Communion..." Additionally, the letter expressed how "with respect to the declaration on the part of Greek-Melkite Catholics of complete adherence to Eastern Orthodoxy, one must keep in mind the fact that the Orthodox Churches are today not yet in full communion with the Church of Rome, and that this adherence is this not possible so long as there is not from both sides an identify of professed and practiced faith." Source: bit.ly/3cxudj4
@@evangelosdiamantopoulos8608 Hey, quick clarification as this didn't seem totally clear in your comment. Eastern Churches don't have to believe all of Western scholastic theology or use Western scholastic theology in their understanding the dogmas and doctrines of the Church. They are encouraged to uphold and use their tradition theological and spiritual outlooks and heritage. Just wanted to make sure that was clear to anyone reading.
That statement about frozen eucharist horrified me. Who would have thought that had the prophet Moses lived in our days the Hebrews could have kept the manna in the freezer and avoided the condemnation upon those who tried to save some for the next day? This somehow feels much worse than when I learned that the eucharist in catholic monstrances are never consumed but kept there until they disintegrate, but it shouldn't because at least frozen body of Christ is eaten
As far as I understand, its not the Body of Christ that is frozen or otherwise refrigerated, it is the ordinary leavened bread which is blessed but not consecrated, distributed as the antidoron during certain feasts.
Hey Bojan, did you watch that Pints With Aquinas interview where an Eastern Catholic priest points out that Pope Benedict wrote a paper where he actually agreed that the the Filoque should be be dropped? He’s still technically the Pope, and if he says it, it seems like it could happen. Here’s the link to the quote th-cam.com/video/LX9Os1ZMnjY/w-d-xo.html
While he was head of the CDF, his document Dominus Iesus (which was all about how Jesus/His Church are the only way to salvation/fleshing that doctrine out), when it quotes the Creed, it did not use the Filioque (see paragraph 1 here: www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html )
As an easterner I see a huge amount of byzantine influence in the western orthodox parishes. Way more than latinizations in eastern catholic churches. My parish has zero latinizations.
Good video Bojan. I wish my parish could afford a proper iconostasis but we are working on saving up. Also I've never heard of or seen the frozen treats and hopefully I never will hahaha
I think you should look into Matt Fradd, he’s a catholic speaker who runs the podcast Pints with Aquinas. He did an interview with a Ruthenian-Catholic priest that discusses many of these issues and discusses some key points that are misunderstood. Also the reason why these Orthodox rites inside of the Catholic Church are allowed to celebrate with leavened bread, can leave out the filioque, have married priests, and maintain Orthodox tradition is because the Catholic Church only demands uniformity on these points inside of the Roman rite, it's a misconception that the Church demands uniformity where in actuality it promotes diversity. I highly suggest you watch Matt Fradd’s interview, and I love your videos!
Wouldn't it be biased if the two speakers on that show are Catholic and not at least include an Orthodox speaker? I suppose I'd have to listen to it myself
There are Byzantine "Georgian" Baptists also. I think they're just plain weird. Real Baptists would have nothing to do with vestments or incense, or liturgy at all.
Hello new friends 🙋♀️ I am Latin catholic from The United states. My family is indigenous and was converted to Catholicism only 550 years or so ago thanks to catholic priests that came to the new world to spread the gospel. Contrary to what people think, with the exception of the Anglican "comunion" most catholic countries that came to the new world did not try to out right murder us. In the case of Spain, queen Isabela proclaimed all indigenous people as hers and order for nobody to hurt us. Some were disobedient to the pious queen, but my tribe exist to this day because of priests who converted us. My tribe is called the Pasqua Yaqui tribe, it means the Paschal people because we accepted the risen Lord! To my newly discovered eastern brothers and sisters in Christ: I love you all, so so much. Thanks to this new age of the internet, I feel like I have found a whole new family that I never knew existed! I feel like I am home when I found you guys! Please dont forget to include indigenous people in your prayers, we have tried to hold onto the early missionaries traditions but after the expulsion of European powers in the Americas, many if us Catholics have felt left behind and alone, especially as indigenous people, when the anglicans came, they did not try to convert us any more, but hunt us down. If we survived it was by the grace if the Almighty alone, and the divine intercession of His Son, who loves all God's children. I love you, I miss you, I feel like I have missed you my whole life and you make me feel like I am home With love and blessings from your little sister in USA 💖🌹
Any sources for what you say? I'm not saying you're wrong or that I don't believe you or anything like that. I just wanna research that stuff for myself.
@@siervodedios5952 what do you mean? There's so many accounts of the Jesuits preaching and being tortured to death for spreading the gospel in the America's, many of them saints. there's the story of Saint Kateri, there's Father de Smett, there's secular accounts to corroborate the lives and deaths of the priests who came to the Americas, there's Fray Batrolome de las Casas... I definitely would look into him
The pre-Filioque creed is still valid in the Catholic Church, so the easterners are allowed to use it, but the new Filioque one is the preferred one. They are ok with this because they are allowed to have it their own way I guess. The driving force of the eastern Catholics is unity, not those “nuances” I guess
It’s because if we believe the HS comes from the father and son (which makes sense because the trinity is one), it is also true that the HS comes from the father. It’s like having a little circle (HS coming from the father) inside of a big circle (HS como no from the father and son). Personally I feel it may be more accurate that the HS comes from the father but there is not enough evidence that proves HS does not also come from the son. Because of that, I accept and embrace both. I will never know the truth until I go to God, and to be honest, it really doesn’t matter - it’s all God.
@@mujerdivina1590 It does matter. In the Creed we confess "we believe in one God the Father... and in one Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit...," hence God's oneness is anchored in the person of the Father. Orthodox Metropolitan and theologian John Zizioulas puts it, "What therefore is important in trinitarian theology is that God 'exists' on account of a person, the Father, and not on account of a substance." The Spirit clearly must proceed from the Father alone, since the Son does not possess the Father’s person; only the Father’s nature. St. John of Damascus says: “The Father derives from Himself His being, nor does He derive a single quality from another. Rather He is Himself the beginning and cause of the existence of all things both as to their nature and mode of being.... All then that the Son and the Spirit have is from the Father, even their very being: and unless the Father is, neither the Son nor the Spirit is. And unless the Father possesses a certain attribute, neither the Son nor the Spirit possesses it: and through the Father, that is, because of the Father's existence, the Son and the Spirit exist.” It is therefore impossible-and Orthodox theology will pay great attention to this-to isolate, in the trinitarian fullness, a bilateral relation that excludes the third, and that on the very level of exposition, of an understanding of the mystery. Any elaboration of the eternal "processions" which tends to posit first the eternal generation of the Son, and then, in a second moment somehow, the procession of the Holy Spirit "from the Father and the Son" runs the risk of breaking what is essential in the trinitarian revelation, this simultaneity, this reciprocity, this properly trinitarian way of thinking about the origin of the Son and that of the Spirit, "at once" (ama), St John of Damascus says. This means that the Son and the Spirit come simultaneously from the Father, without it being possible to establish a gap between a first moment and a second moment, the Spirit being present and participating in the eternal generation. Any choice between the various trinitarian outlines runs the risk of being fatal, of diminishing the trinitarian message and the ability of the Church to partake of the trinitarian fullness.
The Filioque (and the "Deum de Deo") in the Niceno-Constationpolitan Procession of Faith in the Latin Rite is a long-standing tradition and states the Catholic belief of the procession of the Holy Spirit with more clarity and truth (due to the "procedit" instead of "ekporeusis"). (Most) Eastern Catholics do not use it because their traditions always used the OG Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, and those traditions are respected. Also, to note, is that adding the Filioque to the Creed in Greek would cause heretical meaning (due to the difference between procedit and ekporeusis).* The Creed in Greek is not in conflict with the Creed in Latin but instead complimentary, as each tells a distinct but equally valid truth on the procession of the Spirit. Even though they don't have the Filioque(or per filium) in their Profession of Faith, the doctrine that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, as principle/origin, and the Son, in eternal participation, is still (or at least should be) part of their faith as Catholics and part of catechesis (see for instance A Byzantine Catechism for Adults - St. Nicholas of Myra Byzantine Catholic Church). *This is why Latin Rite Masses in Greek also don't have the Filioque I would recommend reading the PCPCU's** Clarification on the Filioque titled "The Greek and Latin Traditions About the Procession of the Holy Spirit:" www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1176. I would also recommend CCC paragraphs #243-248, #261-267, #687-747, and #1091-1112 for the Catholic Church's beliefs on the Holy Spirit. **The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity Here's also a decent Eastern Catholic article on the Filioque: east2west.org/sp_faq/filioque/ For more on the Filioque, this is a decent resource: christian.net/resources/the-filioque-clause/. There's also this really long, really good article on the Filioque: www.catholicbridge.com/orthodox/catholic-orthodox-filioque-father-son.php Even though it's long, I would recommend reading the whole thing.
It's because the filioque is heretical when translated into greek, there is a language barrier. The theological language of the east is greek, so it is omitted.
Eastern Catholics are just Orthodox Christians that were aggressively evangelized by the Catholic Church during the period of western influence in Russia, and after Greece/southern Slavs gained their freedom from the Ottomans. Other than a few small differences that you mentioned here, they are Orthodox people. Many were either forced to convert via threats of bodily harm, or were taken advantage of in their time of need. It was very common for the Catholic Church to go into Greek villages during the mid to late 19th century and build schools. They would then offer free education to all children who’s parents converted to Catholicism. There were a lot of cruel practices like this during the period right after the Ottomans were kicked out, but I’m sure you know all about this sort of thing being a Serb. Same thing happened in post-USSR countries after the Soviets fell, but this time with Protestants. No charity, or honest Christian love, just waves of evangelists coming to convert Orthodox people when they were at their lowest. A friend at my parish did this sort of thing in Lithuania for years, but thank God he saw the error of his ways and converted to Orthodoxy.
Very sad history between east and west and sadly the street goes both ways. Many eastern Catholic churches were dissolved and forced into union with their eastern orthodox counterparts by the Soviet Union. Some almost completely ceased to exist, like the Greek Catholic church of Belarus (which was a majority prior to communism). We have never been able to fully recover our numbers to this day. You could even go back and look at fierce persecution of pro-unionists living in Byzantium, which included most of the bishops and priests within the nation at the time. But I assure you the majority of eastern catholics today were not forced into union and are not ignorant of their beliefs. We know what we stand for and are fully committed to our doctrines, just as I am sure western rite orthodox are committed to theirs. Afterall, the last Byzantine emperor died as a stalwart byzantine Catholic :)
TheMorbidMole No doubt there has been blood spilt on both sides of the schism, and all of it is tragic. I was just illustrating a specific instance that was pertinent to the topic at hand. Where you sit will determine your point of view. Orthodox people view the western rite as pre-schism Orthodoxy in the west, whereas the eastern catholic rite is seen as a post-schism attempt by the Papacy to convert the Orthodox people. I’m sure from a Catholic perspective it is the exact opposite. My point is Christian charity and human decency should overrule a desire to convert. Also I think Emperor Constantine XI attempts you accept Papal Supremacy were caused by a desire for military aid, not his love for Rome. It’s definitely better to be Catholic than to by conquered by the Ottomans, lol. Love and Peace brother
@@walrusking148 I am always sad to see christians evangelizing other christians, especially two apostolic churches. I think the last last emperor was a more dynamic character than people give him credit for. For my senior exit paper for my history degree in college I got to write on the council of florence and subsequent schism. He seemed to be intellectually committed to union and was staunchly catholic even up to death, long after his nation was reduced to an ottoman millet. Unfortunately I don't think we will ever know his inner mind.
Lol right? The iconostases are always see-through in eastern Catholic Churches. I always thought it was due to them being in borrowed churches from the Catholics (usually baroque churches in my country), but if this difference can also be seen in Serbia then I guess there is something going on
Full icon screens are extremely expensive so you see a lot of half-assed ones in America where we don't have the luxury of having pre-built churches hundreds of years old like europe.
you can say that the West has a slight distaste for iconostases, rood screens and so on. it's not even a new distaste, the Council of Trent also encouraged that churches be designed so people can see the liturgy.
@@rin_etoware_2989 Byzantine Catholic Churches aren't Western. As to your statement on the iconstasis, half of the EO Churches here have an iconstasis just like you described for Byzantine Catholics. I know of one OCA, two Greek, and one Antiochian in just my area (50 mile radius) like that.
Eastern Catholic here. We do not accept purgatory, the filioque, and the dogma of the assumption. We see the Pope as the pre-schism East did, as the first among equals. On the Iconostasis issue this is usually because Eastern Catholic churches, especially in America, have lower attendance and finances than Orthodox churches.
This is... absolutely heretical, it goes againts a number of Councils, which Rome considers to be Ecumenical and puts anathema on people who reject those. You can't claim to be in communion with Rome, while holding to a belief which, according to Rome, breaks your communion with it. I'm sorry, but your belief is self-contradictory and goes againts faith and reason. And no, "Eastern Catholics" as a body do not reject those. The ones in my town even say the filioque in the creed and official website of ECC in my country displays the creed with filioque.
I would recommend you reading The Catholicism of the Catholic Church and A Byzantine Catechism for Adults - St. Nicholas of Myra Byzantine Catholic Church.
I highly recommended you read this link: east2west.org/faq/doctrine/ Eastern Catholics may not use the same terminology when talking about dogmas of purgatory and the assumption but the essential substance is the same. A dogma is a infallible, binding truth revealed by God, and thus, an essential belief as a Catholic (regardless of whether one is Western, Byzantine, Coptic, Armenian, etc. Catholic).
I can tell the difference between an Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic church by its iconostasis as well. EC icon screens tend to be built in funny polygonal shapes that we would not use. I blame the recent modernisms and aesthetic/architectural innovation so unfortunately rife within mainstream Catholicism. This trend is sad for me to see; even though I am Orthodox, I see Catholicism as a beautiful religion that does not deserve to be betrayed and despoiled by its own authorities.
Greek orthodox parishes in the US do the same thing in a lot of cases. I think it has more to do with constructing on a budget because full icon screens are extremely expensive and Americans don't have the luxury of having beautiful churches that are many hundreds of years old.
The Byz Cath churches in PA were built in the 1800's with 4-tier iconostasis, many imported from Europe. The churches built after the 1950's tend to have 1 level.
That’s surprising to see. I currently attend a Melkite parish right now and they’re pretty much about as Eastern as one can get. No see-through iconostasis, as many icons as can be afforded for a small church surrounded by Latins, no filioque in the liturgy, etc. I’ve always seen the Melkites as the most “Orthodox” of the Eastern Churches.
That does not surprise me about the Eastern Catholic frozen bread. Once you understand what happened with The Catholic Church and the schism, you understand who they are aligned.
Some do, some don't. Antiochians seem to embrace the Latin devotions more in my limited experience. ROCOR WR is slightly easternized in some respects: no statues, and communion is by spoon, not in wafer form. EO can have a tendency see anything Western or Latin as bad, even though Orthodox Latins were a thing for over 1000 years. It kind of makes me crazy sometimes.
@@jajohnson7809 Frankly, many post-schism Roman Catholic practices are bad from the Orthodox perspective. The Eucharist, both in form and administration, is severely different now than the pre-schism church, some bordering on heretical like communion in the hand. Statuary as a means of decorating churches was uncommon throughout the church, and frankly I don't know of a single example before the Gothic period where 3D statuary was normal.
Bojan, as an Eastern Catholic I appreciate your neutral and factual answer. The level of latinizations vary wildly from Eparchy to Eparchy, parish to parish, priest to priest, and layperson to layperson.
@HolyHammerOfByzantium False. All Catholics regardless of Sui Juris accepts ALL Catholic doctrine including the Papacy. The Pope has universal jurisdiction unhindered. If you believe otherwise, you're not Catholic. He simply isn't head of our local Church, be he is on the universal level just like for Roman Catholics.
@@Tsalagi978 hahahah! fatality, flawless, hahahaha! 3 thumbs up, vs his 50, you bug.
Thank you Bojan for the video. I am an Eastern Catholic, or more technically I am a member of an Eastern Catholic parish, and I appreciate your video. Far too often, I see certain Orthodox people calling Eastern Catholics vile names. Sadly, forced conversions happened at various times and places, and both sides are guilty. I know exactly what you are talking about regarding the iconostasis. Many Greek Orthodox churches in the US are of the same style. Thankfully, my church has a full iconostasis. Also, I'm pretty sure that we do not freeze our prosphora, but I cannot speak for every church.
Is there a difference between Byzantine Catholic, Eastern Catholic, and Orthodox?
@@universalistsnape8584 Yes. There are some eastern Christians who are in communion with Rome and some that are not. Those who are in communion with Rome are Eastern Catholics, and those who are not are Eastern Orthodox. Some Eastern Catholics follow the Byzantine Rite. Those are Byzantine Catholics. Other Eastern Catholics are from different rites, such as Armenian, Coptic, and Syriac.
That was helpful thanks! so what does “in communion with” mean exactly?
@@universalistsnape8584 Churches that can celebrate the Eucharist or communion together. Further, they believe each church is valid and have the same theology.
Regarding catholic dogmas, one of my eastern catholic friends basically said that the bare minimum is to believe that they are not heretical. They do not use the filioque, but they do not consider it to be heretical.
Also, yeah it's pretty easy to tell if a church is eastern Catholic by the iconostasis. My guess for why is because most of these iconostases were built in the 60s and 70s, so apart from usually (but not always) being reduced, they are usually built with an almost art deco, art nouveau style. If it looks like Tolkien designed it, it's eastern catholic.
In NE PA, the Slavic churches have iconostasis that reach the ceiling.
Slavic Catholic that is. (Ukrainian and Carpatho Rusyn)
@@rustybeltway2373 And in other places in NE PA, not to mention other places and states, the (Ruthenian) bishop took the iconostases out completely. I was there in a church where that happened, and it wasn't the only one by any means.
re: the frozen bread....the words to note from Bojan here are 'I have heard....I have heard....I have heard...' quite.
I am an easter catholic(melkite), and i really enjoy your Channel😊
Melkite here too. St. John Chrysostom in Atlanta.
Adding some nuance: the Melkite patriarch, for example, refused to subscribe to the decree of papal infallibility. When pressured to do so, he added a codicil, "saving all the rights and privileges of the patriarchs."
In 1995 the vast majority of the Melkite Greek Catholic bishops signed the following statement: “Profession of Faith
“1. I believe everything which Eastern Orthodoxy teaches.
“2. I am in communion with the Bishop of Rome as the first among the bishops, according to the limits recognized by the Holy Fathers of the East during the first millennium, before the separation."
That's fine and dandy for the Melkite Patriarch to say, but the de jure fact is that the Pope has complete and total power over them like every other Catholic
I have been to Melkite Churches and I know wonderful people of the Melkite Church and I am Orthodox and I can tell you that they are more adherent to Orthodoxy than most Orthodox in America. I love Orthodoxy because of the Patriarchs being equal. If we focused on collegiality more we would do even better. Go out to the Vortex and other strict Roman Catholic Channels on You Tube and you will see much harsher opinions of Catholic Bishops from their own people than we Orthodox have of them. The Orthodox need to stand firm on what we do and lovingly welcome these good people into our faith after they have had enough of their bishops. Papal infallibility is a very recent 19th Century innovation that is nonsense. The primacy of the Ecumenical Counsels in Orthodoxy is wonderful and has prevented idiotic changes that weaken the faith and sacrilegiously cheapen the Holy Liturgy. I was Catholic and I came into Orthodoxy and converted with joy. I actually went back to my roots by coming to Orthodoxy and it's wonderful Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom that I grew up with before the innovations that wrecked everything.
That was the Zoghby Initiative spearheaded by Archbishop Elias Zoghby. The Initiative tried to allow inter-communion between the Melkite Greek Catholic Church and the Antiochian Orthodox Church. This goal can find its roots in that the Melkite Church once had, or at the very least considered itself in, dual communion with both Rome and Constantinople. In 1724, a schism split the Melkite Church into the Melkite Greek Catholic Church and the Antiochian Orthodox Church, and Archbishop Elias and many Melkites considered the latter as their sister church. That's the context, but back to the Initiative. The Initiative tried to bring unity to the two churches. The Initiative, however, was not accepted by the Catholic nor Orthodox Church. The Antiochian Orthodox Church stated that "our Synod believes that inter-communion cannot be separated from the unity of faith. Moreover, inter-communion is the last step in the quest for unity and not the first." Source: bit.ly/3dwcgmh
The response from Rome, which I should note was never officially published but was shared by Bishop Nicholas Samra and later made public, stated that it is necessary that "the sharing of the contents of dialogue not be limited solely to the two direct interlocutors [dialogists]... but that it should also implicate the wider Confessions with which the two Patriarchates are in full communion: the Catholic Communion... and the Orthodox Communion..." Additionally, the letter expressed how "with respect to the declaration on the part of Greek-Melkite Catholics of complete adherence to Eastern Orthodoxy, one must keep in mind the fact that the Orthodox Churches are today not yet in full communion with the Church of Rome, and that this adherence is this not possible so long as there is not from both sides an identify of professed and practiced faith." Source: bit.ly/3cxudj4
@@evangelosdiamantopoulos8608 Hey, quick clarification as this didn't seem totally clear in your comment. Eastern Churches don't have to believe all of Western scholastic theology or use Western scholastic theology in their understanding the dogmas and doctrines of the Church. They are encouraged to uphold and use their tradition theological and spiritual outlooks and heritage. Just wanted to make sure that was clear to anyone reading.
Honestly, then why don't they return to Orthodoxy if that's what they truly believe. That's the only thing that makes sense.
I can finally watch new content from Bojan
That statement about frozen eucharist horrified me. Who would have thought that had the prophet Moses lived in our days the Hebrews could have kept the manna in the freezer and avoided the condemnation upon those who tried to save some for the next day?
This somehow feels much worse than when I learned that the eucharist in catholic monstrances are never consumed but kept there until they disintegrate, but it shouldn't because at least frozen body of Christ is eaten
As far as I understand, its not the Body of Christ that is frozen or otherwise refrigerated, it is the ordinary leavened bread which is blessed but not consecrated, distributed as the antidoron during certain feasts.
Hey Bojan, did you watch that Pints With Aquinas interview where an Eastern Catholic priest points out that Pope Benedict wrote a paper where he actually agreed that the the Filoque should be be dropped? He’s still technically the Pope, and if he says it, it seems like it could happen. Here’s the link to the quote th-cam.com/video/LX9Os1ZMnjY/w-d-xo.html
While he was head of the CDF, his document Dominus Iesus (which was all about how Jesus/His Church are the only way to salvation/fleshing that doctrine out), when it quotes the Creed, it did not use the Filioque (see paragraph 1 here: www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html )
Bojan, The real question is what’s the difference between Western Orthodox (which exists in America for example) and Roman Catholics?
As an easterner I see a huge amount of byzantine influence in the western orthodox parishes. Way more than latinizations in eastern catholic churches. My parish has zero latinizations.
Good video Bojan. I wish my parish could afford a proper iconostasis but we are working on saving up. Also I've never heard of or seen the frozen treats and hopefully I never will hahaha
I think you should look into Matt Fradd, he’s a catholic speaker who runs the podcast Pints with Aquinas. He did an interview with a Ruthenian-Catholic priest that discusses many of these issues and discusses some key points that are misunderstood. Also the reason why these Orthodox rites inside of the Catholic Church are allowed to celebrate with leavened bread, can leave out the filioque, have married priests, and maintain Orthodox tradition is because the Catholic Church only demands uniformity on these points inside of the Roman rite, it's a misconception that the Church demands uniformity where in actuality it promotes diversity. I highly suggest you watch Matt Fradd’s interview, and I love your videos!
Wouldn't it be biased if the two speakers on that show are Catholic and not at least include an Orthodox speaker? I suppose I'd have to listen to it myself
Thank you for this recommendation!
Me: Oh, he must be drawing a nice picture on a stand.
5 Minutes Later: Ohno. :d
Can you share your opinion on Byzantine rite Lutheranism?
I think there are less than a dozen byzantine lutheran churches in existence 🤔
We live in a cursed timeline
There are Byzantine "Georgian" Baptists also. I think they're just plain weird. Real Baptists would have nothing to do with vestments or incense, or liturgy at all.
@@jajohnson7809 That's wack
I wondered this for years. Is there a video on history on this matter? thanks great video
Hello new friends 🙋♀️ I am Latin catholic from The United states. My family is indigenous and was converted to Catholicism only 550 years or so ago thanks to catholic priests that came to the new world to spread the gospel.
Contrary to what people think, with the exception of the Anglican "comunion" most catholic countries that came to the new world did not try to out right murder us. In the case of Spain, queen Isabela proclaimed all indigenous people as hers and order for nobody to hurt us. Some were disobedient to the pious queen, but my tribe exist to this day because of priests who converted us.
My tribe is called the Pasqua Yaqui tribe, it means the Paschal people because we accepted the risen Lord!
To my newly discovered eastern brothers and sisters in Christ: I love you all, so so much. Thanks to this new age of the internet, I feel like I have found a whole new family that I never knew existed! I feel like I am home when I found you guys!
Please dont forget to include indigenous people in your prayers, we have tried to hold onto the early missionaries traditions but after the expulsion of European powers in the Americas, many if us Catholics have felt left behind and alone, especially as indigenous people, when the anglicans came, they did not try to convert us any more, but hunt us down.
If we survived it was by the grace if the Almighty alone, and the divine intercession of His Son, who loves all God's children.
I love you, I miss you, I feel like I have missed you my whole life and you make me feel like I am home
With love and blessings from your little sister in USA 💖🌹
Any sources for what you say? I'm not saying you're wrong or that I don't believe you or anything like that. I just wanna research that stuff for myself.
@@siervodedios5952 what do you mean? There's so many accounts of the Jesuits preaching and being tortured to death for spreading the gospel in the America's, many of them saints. there's the story of Saint Kateri, there's Father de Smett, there's secular accounts to corroborate the lives and deaths of the priests who came to the Americas, there's Fray Batrolome de las Casas... I definitely would look into him
The difference between Oriental and Eastern Orthodox plz.
I can’t figure out what he’s drawing… anyone?
bible-illustrated.blogspot.com/2019/02/Pr12.html
Thank you, St. Alexis Toth, for shining the light here in America. ❤️☦️❤️
If Eastern Catholics don’t use the Filioque, why do Latin rite Catholics? And why are Eastern Catholics ok with this?
The pre-Filioque creed is still valid in the Catholic Church, so the easterners are allowed to use it, but the new Filioque one is the preferred one. They are ok with this because they are allowed to have it their own way I guess. The driving force of the eastern Catholics is unity, not those “nuances” I guess
It’s because if we believe the HS comes from the father and son (which makes sense because the trinity is one), it is also true that the HS comes from the father. It’s like having a little circle (HS coming from the father) inside of a big circle (HS como no from the father and son). Personally I feel it may be more accurate that the HS comes from the father but there is not enough evidence that proves HS does not also come from the son. Because of that, I accept and embrace both. I will never know the truth until I go to God, and to be honest, it really doesn’t matter - it’s all God.
@@mujerdivina1590 It does matter. In the Creed we confess "we believe in one God the Father... and in one Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit...," hence God's oneness is anchored in the person of the Father.
Orthodox Metropolitan and theologian John Zizioulas puts it, "What therefore is important in trinitarian theology is that God 'exists' on account of a person, the Father, and not on account of a substance."
The Spirit clearly must proceed from the Father alone, since the Son does not possess the Father’s person; only the Father’s nature.
St. John of Damascus says:
“The Father derives from Himself His being, nor does He derive a single quality from another. Rather He is Himself the beginning and cause of the existence of all things both as to their nature and mode of being.... All then that the Son and the Spirit have is from the Father, even their very being: and unless the Father is, neither the Son nor the Spirit is. And unless the Father possesses a certain attribute, neither the Son nor the Spirit possesses it: and through the Father, that is, because of the Father's existence, the Son and the Spirit exist.”
It is therefore impossible-and Orthodox theology will pay great attention to this-to isolate, in the trinitarian fullness, a bilateral relation that excludes the third, and that on the very level of exposition, of an understanding of the mystery.
Any elaboration of the eternal "processions" which tends to posit first the eternal generation of the Son, and then, in a second moment somehow, the procession of the Holy Spirit "from the Father and the Son" runs the risk of breaking what is essential in the trinitarian revelation, this simultaneity, this reciprocity, this properly trinitarian way of thinking about the origin of the Son and that of the Spirit, "at once" (ama), St John of Damascus says.
This means that the Son and the Spirit come simultaneously from the Father, without it being possible to establish a gap between a first moment and a second moment, the Spirit being present and participating in the eternal generation. Any choice between the various trinitarian outlines runs the risk of being fatal, of diminishing the trinitarian message and the ability of the Church to partake of the trinitarian fullness.
The Filioque (and the "Deum de Deo") in the Niceno-Constationpolitan Procession of Faith in the Latin Rite is a long-standing tradition and states the Catholic belief of the procession of the Holy Spirit with more clarity and truth (due to the "procedit" instead of "ekporeusis"). (Most) Eastern Catholics do not use it because their traditions always used the OG Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, and those traditions are respected. Also, to note, is that adding the Filioque to the Creed in Greek would cause heretical meaning (due to the difference between procedit and ekporeusis).* The Creed in Greek is not in conflict with the Creed in Latin but instead complimentary, as each tells a distinct but equally valid truth on the procession of the Spirit. Even though they don't have the Filioque(or per filium) in their Profession of Faith, the doctrine that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, as principle/origin, and the Son, in eternal participation, is still (or at least should be) part of their faith as Catholics and part of catechesis (see for instance A Byzantine Catechism for Adults - St. Nicholas of Myra Byzantine Catholic Church).
*This is why Latin Rite Masses in Greek also don't have the Filioque
I would recommend reading the PCPCU's** Clarification on the Filioque titled "The Greek and Latin Traditions About the Procession of the Holy Spirit:" www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1176. I would also recommend CCC paragraphs #243-248, #261-267, #687-747, and #1091-1112 for the Catholic Church's beliefs on the Holy Spirit.
**The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity
Here's also a decent Eastern Catholic article on the Filioque: east2west.org/sp_faq/filioque/
For more on the Filioque, this is a decent resource: christian.net/resources/the-filioque-clause/.
There's also this really long, really good article on the Filioque: www.catholicbridge.com/orthodox/catholic-orthodox-filioque-father-son.php Even though it's long, I would recommend reading the whole thing.
It's because the filioque is heretical when translated into greek, there is a language barrier. The theological language of the east is greek, so it is omitted.
If i should go to a Eastern Catholic church it would be the closest to my being Eastern Orthodox
Okay, I gotta ask, what does your name mean?
We're waiting
So what is western orthodoxy?
(Occidental Orthodoxy)
Uniatism in reverse?
Hey! Why is latin dreaded?!?
Domine non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum sed tantum dic verbo et sanabitur anima mea
Eastern Catholics are just Orthodox Christians that were aggressively evangelized by the Catholic Church during the period of western influence in Russia, and after Greece/southern Slavs gained their freedom from the Ottomans. Other than a few small differences that you mentioned here, they are Orthodox people.
Many were either forced to convert via threats of bodily harm, or were taken advantage of in their time of need. It was very common for the Catholic Church to go into Greek villages during the mid to late 19th century and build schools. They would then offer free education to all children who’s parents converted to Catholicism. There were a lot of cruel practices like this during the period right after the Ottomans were kicked out, but I’m sure you know all about this sort of thing being a Serb.
Same thing happened in post-USSR countries after the Soviets fell, but this time with Protestants. No charity, or honest Christian love, just waves of evangelists coming to convert Orthodox people when they were at their lowest. A friend at my parish did this sort of thing in Lithuania for years, but thank God he saw the error of his ways and converted to Orthodoxy.
Very sad history between east and west and sadly the street goes both ways. Many eastern Catholic churches were dissolved and forced into union with their eastern orthodox counterparts by the Soviet Union. Some almost completely ceased to exist, like the Greek Catholic church of Belarus (which was a majority prior to communism). We have never been able to fully recover our numbers to this day. You could even go back and look at fierce persecution of pro-unionists living in Byzantium, which included most of the bishops and priests within the nation at the time.
But I assure you the majority of eastern catholics today were not forced into union and are not ignorant of their beliefs. We know what we stand for and are fully committed to our doctrines, just as I am sure western rite orthodox are committed to theirs. Afterall, the last Byzantine emperor died as a stalwart byzantine Catholic :)
TheMorbidMole
No doubt there has been blood spilt on both sides of the schism, and all of it is tragic. I was just illustrating a specific instance that was pertinent to the topic at hand. Where you sit will determine your point of view. Orthodox people view the western rite as pre-schism Orthodoxy in the west, whereas the eastern catholic rite is seen as a post-schism attempt by the Papacy to convert the Orthodox people. I’m sure from a Catholic perspective it is the exact opposite. My point is Christian charity and human decency should overrule a desire to convert.
Also I think Emperor Constantine XI attempts you accept Papal Supremacy were caused by a desire for military aid, not his love for Rome. It’s definitely better to be Catholic than to by conquered by the Ottomans, lol.
Love and Peace brother
@@walrusking148 catholics and orthodoxs debating peacefully on the Internet, long live Bojan's channel :)
Yes! Long live Bojan!
@@walrusking148
I am always sad to see christians evangelizing other christians, especially two apostolic churches.
I think the last last emperor was a more dynamic character than people give him credit for. For my senior exit paper for my history degree in college I got to write on the council of florence and subsequent schism. He seemed to be intellectually committed to union and was staunchly catholic even up to death, long after his nation was reduced to an ottoman millet. Unfortunately I don't think we will ever know his inner mind.
Marian apparitions are not dogmas.
Lol right? The iconostases are always see-through in eastern Catholic Churches. I always thought it was due to them being in borrowed churches from the Catholics (usually baroque churches in my country), but if this difference can also be seen in Serbia then I guess there is something going on
Full icon screens are extremely expensive so you see a lot of half-assed ones in America where we don't have the luxury of having pre-built churches hundreds of years old like europe.
you can say that the West has a slight distaste for iconostases, rood screens and so on. it's not even a new distaste, the Council of Trent also encouraged that churches be designed so people can see the liturgy.
@@rin_etoware_2989 Byzantine Catholic Churches aren't Western. As to your statement on the iconstasis, half of the EO Churches here have an iconstasis just like you described for Byzantine Catholics. I know of one OCA, two Greek, and one Antiochian in just my area (50 mile radius) like that.
Eastern Catholic here. We do not accept purgatory, the filioque, and the dogma of the assumption. We see the Pope as the pre-schism East did, as the first among equals. On the Iconostasis issue this is usually because Eastern Catholic churches, especially in America, have lower attendance and finances than Orthodox churches.
This is... absolutely heretical, it goes againts a number of Councils, which Rome considers to be Ecumenical and puts anathema on people who reject those. You can't claim to be in communion with Rome, while holding to a belief which, according to Rome, breaks your communion with it. I'm sorry, but your belief is self-contradictory and goes againts faith and reason.
And no, "Eastern Catholics" as a body do not reject those. The ones in my town even say the filioque in the creed and official website of ECC in my country displays the creed with filioque.
I would recommend you reading The Catholicism of the Catholic Church and A Byzantine Catechism for Adults - St. Nicholas of Myra Byzantine Catholic Church.
I highly recommended you read this link: east2west.org/faq/doctrine/
Eastern Catholics may not use the same terminology when talking about dogmas of purgatory and the assumption but the essential substance is the same. A dogma is a infallible, binding truth revealed by God, and thus, an essential belief as a Catholic (regardless of whether one is Western, Byzantine, Coptic, Armenian, etc. Catholic).
I’m decently well versed in Eastern Catholicism via the Ukrainian Church. No, none of those things are rejected. Only expressed differently.
You are a liar or an exception coz most Eastern Catholics including my church accept all this.
I can tell the difference between an Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic church by its iconostasis as well. EC icon screens tend to be built in funny polygonal shapes that we would not use. I blame the recent modernisms and aesthetic/architectural innovation so unfortunately rife within mainstream Catholicism. This trend is sad for me to see; even though I am Orthodox, I see Catholicism as a beautiful religion that does not deserve to be betrayed and despoiled by its own authorities.
Greek orthodox parishes in the US do the same thing in a lot of cases. I think it has more to do with constructing on a budget because full icon screens are extremely expensive and Americans don't have the luxury of having beautiful churches that are many hundreds of years old.
The Byz Cath churches in PA were built in the 1800's with 4-tier iconostasis, many imported from Europe. The churches built after the 1950's tend to have 1 level.
Some melkites use wafers.
That’s surprising to see. I currently attend a Melkite parish right now and they’re pretty much about as Eastern as one can get. No see-through iconostasis, as many icons as can be afforded for a small church surrounded by Latins, no filioque in the liturgy, etc. I’ve always seen the Melkites as the most “Orthodox” of the Eastern Churches.
@@georgelabe-assimo4365 Not in Palestine/Israel xD
That's a big no no. Armenians and Western Churches use Azymes but not Byzantine ones.
I’ll have to be weary and not take communion until I know it’s Eastern Orthodox if I visit other eastern churches haha
why?
That does not surprise me about the Eastern Catholic frozen bread. Once you understand what happened with The Catholic Church and the schism, you understand who they are aligned.
Do Western Rite Orthodox pray the rosary?
Probably. I know plenty of eastern catholics and even eastern orthodox who pray the rosary.
Oh yeah, they do.
Some do, some don't. Antiochians seem to embrace the Latin devotions more in my limited experience. ROCOR WR is slightly easternized in some respects: no statues, and communion is by spoon, not in wafer form. EO can have a tendency see anything Western or Latin as bad, even though Orthodox Latins were a thing for over 1000 years. It kind of makes me crazy sometimes.
There is an Orthodox version of the rosary. I think it comes from St. Seraphim of Sarov.
@@jajohnson7809 Frankly, many post-schism Roman Catholic practices are bad from the Orthodox perspective. The Eucharist, both in form and administration, is severely different now than the pre-schism church, some bordering on heretical like communion in the hand. Statuary as a means of decorating churches was uncommon throughout the church, and frankly I don't know of a single example before the Gothic period where 3D statuary was normal.
Western Rite Orthodox are closer to catholicism than to Eastern Orthodoxy.
We almost began western rite, except for the Grace of the Lord.
St. John of Shanghai would not agree with you.
He does not understand Eastern catholic. Statues? We don’t have them. Eastern Catholics are Orthodox in communion with Rome
They will believe in Purgatory when they get there.
EO is Christian.
I can finally watch new content from Bojan