Western Orthodoxy works differently than Eastern Catholicism. EC have their own dogmas, contrary to the Latin church. Western Orthodoxy retains the same dogmas as their mother Church jurisdiction.
@@themorbidmole9247 Is it not true that “Byzantine Rite Catholics” often venerate St. Gregory Palamas, a man anathematized as a “heretic” by the Roman Rite crowd?
@@brotheraugustine Palamas was not anathematized by the Roman church. Barlaam's criticism of him hardly qualifies as an official anathema from the Romans. Palamas is a regional Saint to our church. He hasn't been canonized officially by the Roman church but, just like the various orthodox churches, there are numerous saints exclusive to local churches. I'm not trying to argue, just telling the guy above that we are doctrinally Catholic, not Orthodox and we don't pretend to be otherwise.
I was blessed to grow up in an "eastern rite" orthodox parish with a priest who was very sympathetic towards the Christian West. He incorporated practices like: chanting the O Antiphons during Advent; reading the traditional proclamation of the Birth of Christ from the Roman Martyrology on Christmas Eve; singing many beloved carols of Western origin around Christmas; teaching us about many pre-schism Western saints; and including information about Western liturgical practices at different points during the liturgical year so we could compare and contrast with what we did. Wherever there was common ground to be found, he brought it to light. I dont remember him ever denigrating the West. I'm very thankful to have been formed by someone humble enough to call out the goodness in what he saw, no matter its origin. As a last thought I'd like to say that this approach is truly Orthodox. As St. Paisios taught, we should be like bees who seek out nectar, and not like flies who are attracted to trash. Austin, thanks for another great interview!
I can't wait for this!!! I've attended Fr. Patrick's parish for a good number of months. It's amazing. It helped me learn and accept the Western Rite completely.
@@no_more_anymore You are a part of the Apostate church - the club of the duped and you have nothing to thank GOD Almighty - (Yehovah Tzveot) for that! The sooner you realize it, the sooner you will turn to the Saviour - Lord Jesus Christ, not to fake manmade rites and traditions accumulated since the 4th century! Even the bible you are reading if you do so, is falsely translated on purpose, to justify fake doctrines of men, not GOD's ones!
This was such a wonderful interview. Father Patrick has a very humble and loving approach, while still holding to his convictions. He touched on a lot of questions I've had, and mentioned multiple things that I myself have noticed but not been able to make sense of in the Western versus Eastern dichotomy, as a new convert to Orthodoxy. Also, blessed feast day to Father Patrick!
I am Roman Catholic and I really appreciated Father's critique of "Lack of fasting and burning the dead." I have terminal cancer and my wife wants me cremated, but I follow the old Catholic belief in burial. Thanks again for a wonderful interview, Austin, and God bless both you and Father Patrick.
As a Catholic, I must say Eastern Orthodoxy’s perception of cremation is missing some core knowledge of Catholic theology so as to get into the honest dialogue. It is NOT implied in the theology of the body and/or the theology of the ressurrection that the deceased body has to be in perfect/undamaged state so as for the faithful to attain resurrection with a glorious perfected body, but the very action of the omnipotent God, in the power of the Holy Spirit, will bring those who resurrect from the dead to glory in the outcome of their bodies despite any of the current limitations. Glorified bodies have some characteristics like impassibilty, subtlety, agility and clarity. I’m not really expanding those explanations, but if a man does not have an arm and a leg he won't resurrect with those defects, either congenital or acquired through life, but as in the perfect “vessel for the Spirit” under the compatible means that assured the flourishment of his soul, of course, but only with a glorious form that will express the incorporation into the Mystical Body of Christ in the glorified Lord. The sempiternal prohibition of the Church concerning deceased bodies refers to 1) desecration, 2) profanation, 3) defilement and 4) violation of the human body due to its intrinsic inalienable value. The Ancient Greek perception of burials - hugely influential into Byzantine Christian culture - is represented by the pagan prohibition to leave dead bodies behind in war fields without a funeral as an offense to the gods of the ‘Polis’ like what we see in the very essential discussion inside “Antigone” (Sophocles play). So it’s not that straightforward to simply say bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and nothing more. A document issued by the Catholic Church in 1963 said cremation wasn't opposed “per se” to Christian religion if it doesn’t come to be made or justified for reasons contrary to Christian doctrine, with further specifications. That’s the core point. So under necessity of times (gigantic mass murders, pandemic, World Wars, deaths by forced starvation, poverty and misery), which means under particular conditions (many of them couldn’t clearly be thought of before), burials received formal canonical treatment and cremations were thought to be not ‘a priori’ an act of desecration/profanation, that means, not forbidden in themselves. Notice cremation was not stimulated but discouraged; it was not made an option available but it was said to be admissible under some circunstancial STRICT necessities. And it wasn’t made morally equivalent to burials; even in the hypothesis admissible, cremations were determined to happen according to sacred funerals norms as said by the Catholic Church. In some Oriental religions death is seen as a transition from one form of matter to another, which is an absurd for a Christian to engage in. So it is of course forbidden to engage in on those because a pantheist cremation _”was chosen for reasons contrary to Christian doctrine”_ (Code of Canon Law, can. 1176 § 3; cf. CCEC, can. 876 § 3). And the Church is the guardian of the Christian doctrines and the Church is the one that can permit or forbid disciplines in order to maintain the very integrity and integrality of those doctrines. That’s clear for a more educated Catholic. But the Church always emphatically recommends the burial of the dead as proper means to deal with the deceased and she STILL DOES, which doesn’t invalidate the fact that some people simply can’t even afford to own - without compromising their means of subsistence - burial places for them or their family, which would maybe imply the need to bury or be buried in public desecrated spaces if they do not want to be treated as indigent and many of these places simply demand cremation due to the lack of geographical space or due to lack of sanitary means in many cities and regions in the globe. Probably most of us won’t have any idea about what extreme poverty means. I sense some of us - well fed and created with all material luxuries one can get - do not really understand what the world is and how few the ones who could have an authentic Christian burial are. The point is not so much the burial (by the way, the Egyptian Pharaoh was a pagan monarch and had a careful/solemn burial) but the Christian funeral. The Catholic Church is UNIVERSAL and the Church extends from one extreme to the other of the globe and she comforts the poorest of the poorest in areas in which people would need to succeed a lot in order to be even named “poor”. The Catholic Church is never provincial, either geographically or culturally. More objectively speaking: the Church authorized cremation NOT under the mere preference of families but under some conditions (any violation of this would be equivalent to unchristian treatment of the deceased) which are the following: 1) it would be asserted that _“cremation, in and of itself, objectively negates neither the Christian doctrine of the soul’s immortality nor that of the resurrection of the body”,_ and it only would be admissible if by sanitary, economic or social considerations (Cf. Holy Office, Instruction Piam et costantem, 5 July 1963: AAS 56 [1964] 822); 2) it must never violate the explicitly stated or the reasonably inferable wishes of the deceased faithful (idem); 3) and it is never authorized to happen in any appearance of pantheism or nihilism or _“to scatter the ashes of the faithful departed in the air, on land, at sea or in some other way, nor may they be preserved in mementos, pieces of jewelry or other objects”,_ and if that is implied, _"the Christian funeral must be denied to that person according to the norms of the law"_ (Code of Canon Law, can. 1184; CCEO, can.876, § 3). Please check the Instruction “Ad resurgendum cum Christo” regarding the burial of the deceased and the conservation of the ashes in the exceptional case of cremation. In ANY cases, _“the ashes of the faithful must be laid to rest in a SACRED place, that is, in a cemetery or, in certain cases, in a church or an area which has been set aside for this purpose, and so dedicated by the competent ecclesial authority”_ (Ad resurgendum cum Christo, CDF, 2016). And if someone has the means to be buried witout cremation, he is morally required to do so. The Catholic Church doesn’t make rules that fit how wordly desires are seen in the latest fashion. That’s just a terrible ideological prejudice that those in schism with us got used to have in their pockets. I’m not saying Eastern Orthodoxy’s mistreatment of Catholic discipline of burials is resultant of bad faith, but it seems to miss the astonishing complexity of the themes discussed, definitely. I’m praying for your healing, brother! 🙏 May God give you the honor to always be with His presence until the definitive encounter yet reestablish your health in the flesh as for now. God bless you and your family!
@@masterchief8179 Too long, didn't read + you're a heretic. The part with "the ashes of the faithful must be laid to resr in a SACRED place...." defeats all your other arguments.
Thanks for another interesting video, Austin. I've recently been reading up on Western Rite Orthodoxy after a Western Rite Orthodox parish was founded in my area, which really piqued my interest. As always your video showed up exactly when I needed it. You're a great soldier for Christ, helping us Christians to better understand one another. Much love to you and all our Christian brothers and sisters out there. God bless.
This might be long-winded, but I felt compelled to share and so I apologize in advance. There was a lot I sympathized with in Fr. Patrick's story, and stuff him and I have talked about myself as I have met him in person like many others and attended his parish several times myself. Ultimately my family and I decided it would be best for us in ROCOR (we ourselves are converts from Catholicism, first Roman to Eastern Catholic, and now to Holy Orthodoxy), but like Fr. Patrick, and others, I still have a heart for the Western Tradition, at least Pre-Schism, and agree that there is definitely an unhealthy level of Anti-Westernism in, particularly, the American variety, of Orthodoxy. With that said, however, I also think there are very really problems in modes of thinking, theology, and praxis that cannot be ignored and are problematic. I think Orthodox can validly critique what we might call "errors of the West" without characterizing it as all "unmitigated darkness". One of the biggest things that aided my conversion to Orthodoxy was, quite simply, the repeated recognition of Catholic scholars like Fr. Yves Congar, or Edward Scienskei (who became Orthodox), or even the Vatican's own theological commissions (like the Chieti Document or the Clarification on the Filioque) that basically conceded (implicitly, if not explicitly in some cases) to Orthodox positions. Fr. Yves Congar in his "900-Years After the Schism" himself notes that a 4th century Western Christian would be at home in an 11th century Western church, but that an 11th century Western Christian would not feel the same in a 12th century church. The fact of the matter is that we can deliberately, precisely, and definitively point to theological and psychological changes in the West, particularly post-schism, that changed the trajectory of that particular tradition. If Fr. Congar is just talking 4th cent to 12th cent, I think you can just as well apply it from 12th or 13th cent to 15th or 16th cent and from there to the Post-Vatican 1 and Post-Vatican 2 Roman church. I sincerely believe at this point that St. Augustine (or St. Gregory the Great or St. Bede the Venerable) would not recognize the 12th cent church and subsequently Aquinas with the Baroque church and the people of that era with the modern Roman Church, and if that is the case we should all be seriously ask ourselves "Why?" and what that means for the West and the Roman Church. If you look at Western churches in France during the Carolingian period or Germany in the Ottonian period, or in Anglo-Saxon England before the Norman conquest it is scarily similar to the art, architecture, and sacramental reality, and vision, of the East. Churches were covered in painted iconography and mosaic and usually following canonical conventions in the East, even a lot of the hagiography sounds similar. Richard Rohlin and Jonathan Pageau in their Universal History series have talked about how almost identical Irish Hagiography is in literary style and tropes to Byzantine hagiography. However, this begins to change, for example, when Charlemagne calls the Council of Frankfurt in the 8th century that actually condemns the 7th Ecumenical Council and Iconography. It's just a hop and a skip from that to the rise of Gothic architecture in the 11th century that represents a very different cosmological vision of the Church and is a break from the previous generations. As Fr. Patrick rightly pointed out you did not have this happen in Italy (which I have been to and can attest to myself) and that is likely because the Italian church (and Rome) never accepted or promulgated the Frankfurt Council and had much more congenial contact with the East, particularly because of the heavy Byzantine influence in Southern Italy (obviously that changed in the following centuries). Also, something that always irks me is the statue conversation. I don't think Orthodox or Catholics really understand this point well. 3D art is not the issue as such. Like Fr. Patrick noted there are religious statues in Russia (I've seen quite a few when I was there) and in Byzantium, among other 3Dish forms of art. However, there is a massively vast different between the sort of static and simply statuary of Late Antiquity/Early/High Middle Ages, and the grotesque, hyper-idealized, eroticized statues of the Renaissance/Baroque periods and later, and that is what Orthodox really have the problem with and for notable reasons. However, it's not as if everything changed overnight or even within a year. I've heard quite a few Orthodox Priests and bishops talk about Medieval theologians, such as Bernard of Clairvaux, being very Orthodox sounding and thinking, but by the time you get to people like Francis Bacon and William of Ockham, both Catholic theologians and noted Franciscan friars, Catholics and Orthodox both seem agree there's a problem. Just some thoughts I wanted to share. Often it seems like one or the other side wants to ignore the issues as all polemics, and the other wants to make the issues so central and large it discredits anything else that might be good and true tied to that particular tradition. Like with most things, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle. God Bless you and all your viewers.
I think the cult of “progress” within Rome over the centuries has had the subtle Modus Opporandi to have been making all these strategic little (and contradictory) compromises whenever faced with real resistance, such as the unique late medieval allowance of the Dutch Archdiocese of Ultrich to retain their own independent Synods, to allowing Uniates to retain Orthodox ideas that blatantly contradict several Roman Dogmas, and many more. Genuine Orthodox will hit a wall as disagreements with growing error reach an impasse that we will not cross through or over, but in similar circumstances, Rome sometimes digs instead a tunnel under the wall to get to the other side and claims that that “doesn’t count” as crossing the wall! All that’s really changed since Vatican 2 is now they are more blatant about their intentions and are less hypocritical about being obvious modernists. The Progressives have avoided major Traditionalist backlashes by carefully hoodwinking them, not always successfully, but enough to have radically changed Rome over 1000 years by 1960, which has again changed as much since 1970 to now as they had in the previous 1,000.
Fr. Yves Congar was an evil Modernist, he absolutely *hated* true Catholicism, and was one of the top heretics in charge at the Vatican II Robber Council. Yves Congar and his cronies began a Neo-Modernist movement that despised the Neo-Scholasticism which had served the Church so well. Their movement was called the "Nouvelle Theologie" (French for "New Theology"), it liked to call itself ressourcement - (“return to the sources"), because they claimed they were "returning to patristic thought” but in reality these Modernist theologians, Congar including, deviated from the long-standing theological tradition of the Catholic Church, thus creating a "new theology" all their own, and a disguised resurgence of Modernism- hence, they were censured under the reign of Pius XII (the last “true” pope) and in 1950, he responded with his great encyclical Humani Generis which condemned many of their errors, such as rejecting the traditional dogmatic formulations that emerged throughout Church history as a result of scholastic theology, re-interpreting Catholic dogma in a way that was inconsistent with tradition, falling into the error of dogmatic relativism and criticizing biblical texts in a way that deviated from the principles of biblical hermeneutics outlined by his predecessors (namely: Pope Leo XIII). Those anti-Vatican II Traditional Catholics who out of desperation, seek a panacea in Russian/Eastern “Orthodoxy”, should be aware that Russian Orthodox “ressourciement” is the seedbed of Vatican II “Nouvelle théologie” and that both are violent, Bolshevik attacks on St. Thomas Aquinas: www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/svsvoices/on_the_mystical_theology_of_the_eastern_church. This is the self-described modernist founder of St Sergius Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris which was the epicenter from which Orthodox theologians like Florovsky, Meyendorff, Lossky, Schmemann spread Russian “Orthodox”neo-Palamism in the West, collaborated with the Modernist infiltrators in the Catholic Church, and participated in the schema of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo. Bulgakov says, “The imprint of our time is stamped vividly on our theological creativity. Since new is the synonym of creativity, we are scolded for our modernism by people...But our modernism is and desires to be a living tradition...”
@John Coolidge Vatican II clearly taught heresy and contradicts previous Catholic, teaching so is clearly not a valid council and not from God, and therefore the authority which gave us Vatican II is not in fact the legitimate Catholic authority at all; the “Popes” which gave us Vatican II are not true Popes, nor are their successors. It has nothing to do with Sobornost “Reception Theory” which is a completely novel theory and very heretical.
@@michaelmchugh3987 He consecrated Jean-Nectaire of Saint-Denis as the Hierarch of the Orthodox Church of France and supported their endeavor for an autocephalous church in France that used Western liturgics. The OCF had and still has many problems but Saint John fully supported the Western Rite in concept
@@distracted900 And then those WR churches in France all apostatized and left the Church, just as St John warned them before leaving France. What should we make of that?
@@mynameisjeff6516 I don't think you're aware of the history of the OCF, because if you did you wouldn't say they left the church. They were kicked out of the Church of Romania with no warning
@@mynameisjeff6516 They didn't leave the church. They were under the Church of Romania for over 20 years, until the Patriarch of Romania kicked them out due to political disputes with the EP. They were never accused of wrongdoing
Hey, you should get Brother Augustine on. He's not clergy but he is an Orthodox Benedictine Oblate, and his journey from Judaism through Freemasonry and occultism then Protestantism and finally to Orthodoxy. He also has experience attending both Eastern Rite and Western Rite parishes. His book 'The Masons and their Lies' is amazing too.
Very interesting! I'm Eastern orthodox from Greece and I had no idea that there were Eastern orthodox churches that have the western rite. Nice to know that westerners that want to follow the orthodox dogma but find the eastern orthodox rite a bit ''exotic'' no have an alternative choice.
It's a Catholic Church still... almost like a trans church... it's pretending to be Orthodox even though it's catholic. There is, nor is there a need for a replacement for the Eastern Orthodox Church. It is the Original Church of Christ.
@@roytofilovski9530 No, it isn't. It's still Catholic. The Catholic Church can not be a part of the Orthodox Church unless it becomes an Orthodox Church... and it's not.
@@spartanastas It's under the jurisdiction of a canonical Orthodox Bishop of a canonical Orthodox Church. It follows the basic Orthodox theology. That makes it Orthodox. The form of the liturgy itself is not relevant so long as it is approved by their Bishop.
I started attending the tridentine mass but im catholic. It is definitively a blessing and I had quite the spiritual experience when receiving communion. Its completely different than the novus ordo catholic mass. I felt shook the entire sunday and ive had a deep repenting of my sins. I had to go and confess again this week as things come up to me. But im so happy. Orthodox or Catholic thank God the tridentine Mass is being revived and divulged
When I first came home to the Orthodox Church, I started out at a western rite parish. I now attend an eastern rite parish - and definitely prefer it - but the western rite will always hold a special place in my heart. Very excited to see this! Thank you for bringing awareness to a very misunderstood and relatively unknown yet vital aspect of the Orthodox faith 😄☦️🙏🏻
@@autisticheadscarf I ❤️ Byzantine chant. To me it was very hard to listen to at first but it grew on me and I LOVE it now. I love the OCA people I’m glad I had the experience there too. I just can’t express how much I LOVE the Greek Orthodox Church!
As a Roman Catholic, I fast and I will not be burned. If that's the top of the list then we're basically roommates. I think the look of the Roman Catholic Church is rough only because of the post conciliar chaos. I think both of those "top" issues are going to sort themselves out. Fasting is already on a comeback, and cremation is strongly discouraged (at least traditionally), which is a move in a positive direction. The schism won't be mended in my or my child's life time, but the it will eventually will be "mended." The union comes when the world is so brutalizing that we will have to unite to support one another. RCC has open arms, we don't expect the OC to open it's arms, but we're looking forward to the day that their back isn't turned to us. This video is highly encouraging and I hope the OC finds more Fr Patricks!
It should be clearly understood that Orthodoxy is not about being "eastern", nor "western" either. That is why I rather dislike the common title "Eastern Orthodox Church". The Church is Orthodox, period. (Well, catholic too, and apostolic, etc.) I happen to be "eastern"; my brother is "western"; we're both converts. The difference lies only in the Divine Liturgy we use primarily. (There are two prominent "eastern" liturgies used at different times in "eastern" parishes, so this is not an anomaly, nor a departure from tradition.) My brother and I are quite different sorts of people. We each have our own preferences and needs generally, and our own different growing to do. We each find the liturgy of our parishes to speak to our own hearts as though we are at home, where the other's liturgy speaks in a different accent. You might think of it as something akin to watching your favorite team play on its home turf one time, or on the visitor's turf another. You focus your attention on the same team, but from different angles. The key is that all these liturgies are expressions of the *same faith* , the *Orthodox faith* . There are not two "orthodoxies". There is mutual acceptance, the same brotherly (and sisterly) love, the same union in the Body of Christ. I attend an eastern liturgy and eastern services, but I am no less western for that: born in the United States, lived here my whole 70 years, where God put me in time and space. If I moved to Greece I'd be just as much a foreigner as an older Greek who moved here. But neither of us would have any reason to consider the other less Orthodox for that. In fact, I'd call it sinful if one of us did. I know a fair number of Greek-born, and they live among us U.S.-born, but I embrace them as they have embraced me. A bit foreign sometimes; not a bit alien. Eastern and Western, of one communion.
I had forgotten where I saw this a bit ago, had been listening to it while painting my front door that day. Finally came across a new video of yours and realized it must have been you... yup. This has got to be one of the best interviews I have heard in years. I'm fascinated to hear an Orthodox take on Western Christianity, as I've long believed the anti-Augustinian and western in general spin in the Orthodox world was one of its biggest flaws, even as the Catholic Church has actively tried to better acknowledge Eastern traditions and rites. It was a perceived and observed bias that effectively halted my own personal dabbling in the EO worlds some time ago. 1054 may be an official mark in the wall. But the issues started long before and really continue to this day. Very, very happy to see at least one leader in the Orthodox Church acknowledge the flaws in the aspects of it that aren't the least bit based on true theological differences. Sadly, I don't see much to suggests these views are widespread. It seems clear to me that many in the EO world don't have a counterpart ideology to Vatican II's "breathe with two lungs" metaphor.
I'll not say too much about this but needless to say I can only thank Fr Patrick for speaking with such humility and love here! A few thoughts from those who dislike the Western Rite (and are Orthodox) Ultimately, if one denies the Western Rite - you deny the Latin patronage of the Orthodox Church, who produced Saints of both East and West and thus, western liturgies, theology and patristics are absolutely equal to their eastern counterpart. To be Orthodox is to accept this, the liturgy changes the cultus of how people are raised spiritually, what Fr Georges Florovsky (quite probably the greatest Orthodox theologian of the 20th century) envisioned is a true patristic synthesis - where both the Eastern and Latin traditions of the Church can be brought together, this is and should be the ultimate goal of the Western Rite, to 'un-easternify' itself and to bring balance to the Traditions of the Church. This means that St Augustine can and should be read as much as St Gregory of Nyssa, St Ambrose as much as St John Chysostom, St Hilary of Poitiers as St Basil the Great. This anti-western attitude is something that Fr Patrick is quite right in pointing out how modern of a novelty it is. When the Saints of the medieval period and early modern (whether St Nicholas Cabasilas, St Mark of Ephesus, St Gennadius Scholarius, St Peter Mogila, St Dimitri of Rostov, just to name a few, met and saw the works of the Latin Fathers, they praised them! They said they were exceptional nourishment for the soul, these same people also did much work in translating post-schism Western works such as Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas and again, they praised these people to high heavens. Did they disagree with some of what they said? Certainly! But they still saw the good that their works did have. Ultimately criticisms of the Western Rite amount to denying the Catholicity of the Orthodox Catholic Church, not because a rite is somehow 'needed' to make the Church 'more Catholic' but rather because it leads people to deny the importance of the Latin Tradition and at times outright denies the graces that were poured out in the west through the spiritual life of the associated Western Rites.
@John Coolidge Did I ever criticise the Eastern Rite? I said nothing of the sort. It's not about whether people feel comfortable with the Churches Rites - It's about the recognition that the Orthodox Catholic Church has various patronages, all of which are equal to each other. The reason why there's such a reluctance for people to convert to Orthodoxy is simply because of this obsession with not hatred of the West, its the neglect of the Western Patronage that pushes people away, especially since Saints, Councils, theologians have all endorsed the Western Rite for this purpose.
@John Coolidge also not I never said that you can't criticise the Western Rite. Are there issues that can creep into something? Yes. Its like with anything as Fr Patrick said, Aquinas and Anselm mightve held errors (Aquinas more so) but that doesn't mean throwing the baby out with the bath water. Saints Mark of Ephesus, Gennadius Scholarius, Gregory Palamas, Dimitri of Rostov, Peter Mogila and many others recognised this, that criticism of something doesn't mean something is inherently bad.
@John Coolidge Notice I said 'Ultimately' and note what I said after. Criticism of Rites isn't what I said was the issue. The reason why it's 'Ultimately' denying the Catholicity is that the arguments against the WR typically boil down to either 1. Eastern Rite Supremacy 2. A belief in the 'Latin Captivity' and general anti-westernism. The Church is Catholic - with multiple patristic and theological traditions that exist and they are equal. Father Georges Florovsky, one of the greatest Orthodox theologians wanted to see all these traditions balance each other. I've yet to see any actual engagement with the points I've made here.
Thanks so much for doing this interview! I struggled with this concept as I am Jamaican and Dutch culturally. So neither of my ethnic roots are very 'eastern'. I also grew up evangelical so every part of my spiritual background felt a little attacked while learning about Orthodoxy. Eventually, through reading St. Herman of Alaska's story my heart was softened towards the Orthodox church (Holy Spirit orchestrated all of that). Listening to this interview has enlightened my journey even more! Especially as I come closer to my baptismal date :)
Why does someone need a western rite ? To me as a western person (former baptist), the Roman Catholic “western” style of worship is way stranger to me than Russian or Byzantine. If Byzantine chant sounds too middle eastern for you, go to a Russian or OCA church the music doesn’t sound that much different than Medieval western church music
Tell me you know nothing about the Western rite without telling me you know nothing about the Western Rite. Hopefully this video will open you up a bit.
St John of Shanghai and San Francisco did so much for the western rite. He’s the one that said don’t let anyone tell you that you need to be eastern in order to be Orthodox, that the west was Orthodox for 1000 years.
Austin, thank you for doing this interview. I do not agree with many statements made in this interview but I am happy to hear them nonetheless. The Western Rite Orthodoxy in theory makes much sense and I believe it was started with the best of intentions BUT in practice it has led to small congregations that convert to Orthodoxy without having to actually accept Orthodoxy. If you can walk from one parish and go into another and nothing changes except the name you commemorate, is that a true inner conversion? I would find it hard to say so. Certainly that is a broad stroke on my part but it is my anecdotal experience as a priest but the fact that many of the Western Rite believers have little or nothing to do with the greater Orthodoxy is proof of this. Further, the Orthodox Church has developed hymnography, menology, spirituality, and an ethos that goes well beyond the liturgy of St. Gregory the Great. Accepting that inheritance has little to do with becoming Russian Or Greek... it is just Orthodox.
I’d have to say this is not the experience I’ve had becoming Orthodox in a Western Rite parish. I suppose it happens somewhere. We go to Eastern Rite parishes when on vacation. We have many many Eastern Orthodox books in our parish. We really look to all this for the fullness of the faith.
Father bless, I understand where you are coming from but it's hard to agree when my own personal experience has been opposite of what you described. What I have seen however, is Eastern Rite brothers and sisters in Christ judge those in the Western Rite for having a deficient Orthodoxy just because they have looked at it from the surface and completely diminish the fruits of the Western patrimony in our own lives. It seems like it would be hard to arrive at a certain level of communion and comradery when a lot of the times those on the Western Rite are, from the ourset, treated as second class citizens just because of their liturgical expression of Orthodoxy. I think there is always a conflation between the idea that to be Orthodox, you must have the eastern ethos and therefore anything that deviates from that cannot be Orthodox, but that is clearly not true or else we would have to concede saints such as St. Ambrose, St. Patrick, St. Jerome and Pope St. Leo and Gregory, St. Augustine as less than Orthodox, and I am not ready to do that. I believe that to doubt the genuine Orthodoxy of those in the Western Rite and assume they are disguised Roman Catholics and assume there was never a conversion to begin with every time the topic is brought up does a diservice to the church as a whole, and that is exactly why I don't go around saying that Cradle Greek parishes are not genuinely Orthodox just because I have personally experienced that they tend to have a higher degree of luke-warm Christians.
Fr. Michael, it's my pleasure! I must say, the second sentence of this comment is exemplary of the kind of interaction I hope to see with the content on this channel.
One example of anti-Westernism in Orthodoxy... When I was preparing for chrismation, I initially chose a cross that was a Celtic crucifix. Some Orthodox online told me the cross wasn't appropriate because the feet of Christ were depicted one over the other, pierced by a single nail, which is common in western crucifixes. (Some Orthodox even consider such a depiction of Christ's feet heretical. The "triclavian" heresy.) Feeling a bit dejected, I chose another cross. During Holy Week some time later, when the crucifix behind the altar was brought out, processed around the congregation, and placed up front for our veneration, I noticed the feet were depicted as in that Celtic crucifix-rather than the more common Byzantine style of feet side-by-side, punctured by separate nails.
I would love to hear you talk to a priest or Bishop from the Anglican Rite of the Catholic Church--Officially referred to as the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter. I believe that there are 23 parishes in America. I was raised in the Protestant Episcopal church but have been a Roman Catholic since 1978---and I am seriously considering retiring to an area that has an Ordinariate parish. The words of the liturgy are largely based in the English of the mid 16th century--moving and beautiful!
I second this Ordinariate is very beautiful, reverent and traditional while being in English. Austin if you can attend mass or morning and evening prayer.
@@GospelSimplicity And I would recommend you try to get in contact with Archpriest Emeritus Lester Bundy of Saint Columba Orthodox, Lafayette Colorado. He represents the Orthodox equivalent of the Ordinate that Jean Dotan is talking about, Anglican Rite Orthodoxy, a subset of Western Orthodoxy a bit different from Father Cardine’s direct and plain translation of Saint Gregory The Great’s Divine Liturgy. Instead, Saint Tikhon of Moscow rehabilitated Cranmer’s Anglican mass (itself a simplified version of the venerable Divine Liturgy of Saint Osmond, the “Salisbury/Sarum Rite”), for use by former Anglican priests converted to Orthodoxy who were unable to learn Osmond’s Mass in its original form, for whatever reason. This rehabilitation was much easier to learn. Father Bundy is an expert on the Anglican Rite and a fantastic Iconographer in the Anglo-Saxon/Celtic style of Britannia. Here’s most of a lecture series he did two years ago (I missed part 2) th-cam.com/video/OMx98TeTKsU/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/NapMnT2Rt5k/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/mqeBqpdiLRk/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/GA-R8t0ehHo/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for the video. I hope that you can bring in Fr. Thomas Loya, a Byzantine Catholic priest who talks about the “genus” of the West and the East. It is within the genus of the East, to draw people in her liturgy. While it is in the genus of the West to be more sharp when the Church needs to clarify things, etc.
Although I am fascinated by WR and have attended a nearby one a few times and admire their priest, it would be nice to hear Fr. Patrick in a discussion with someone who perhaps is “guilty” of some of these eastern polemics he talks about. I’ve listened to several of his interviews and he never gets any push back against some of his claims and I’d like to see what Fr. Trenham or Fr. Strickland might have to say about some of his remarks in a venue where there could be direct back and forth.
@John Coolidge There's an article written by Fr. Patrick himself on the Orthodox West website (link in the description of the video) called "Benediction-Adoration: A Beautiful vision" where he defends Adoration. I would post the direct link but TH-cam keeps deleting my comment even if I try to work around it.
@John Coolidge To be fair, they don’t usually Consecrate the Eucharist specifically for this, the way modern Romans do, but encourage veneration of surplus. We have a lot of people who have to make long commutes to church and sometimes can’t make it, (SO many are converted from online study and aren’t necessarily close to a parish when they do) so our priests take a lot of pre sanctified Eucharist to people all over throughout the week who couldn’t make it to mass that Sunday. Is the Surplus kept for such circuit preaching and shut-ins not worthy of veneration in the meantime? It is how Rome started Eucharistic veneration to begin with, but they took it a step too far in standardizing it whether or not there was a surplus waiting (or even needed) for travel, instead of letting it happen mostly organically. Also, using a sample of a Meal to advertise a meal is an age old and effective way to promote It.
This helps me so much with the question of my idenity. I am a Scottish American, I'm far from Eastern or Russian. Wish I could, go American Orthodox. I'm am blessed with the 3 choices near me. Thank you!
Read “Ex Oriente Lux” a brilliant biography, by Abba Seraphim, of Dr. Joseph J. Overbeck and his tragic rivalry with Father Stephen Hatherly, and the beginning and disagreements about the Western Orthodox revival.
Just sang the service for St. Patrick yesterday at my Orthodox parish. But he’s right; “western” is a dirty word. Thus conversation has to be had theologically, though, and in dialogue. There’s reasons for this beyond chauvinism or ignorance. The Dr. Jeannie Constantinou’s are going to have to be convinced about Western vs. Eastern “thinking.”
He's so right about losing 1,000 converts. I love Orthodoxy but my family got turned against it when some of the anti-Protestant things were mentioned. If someone is seeking, it's best to not insult how they came to Christ. Only a miracle will get them into Orthodoxy at this point. I feel "home" and love the Liturgy but the Slavic traditions are too much for them. On another topic, Protestants are so seeker-sensitive that they try not to offend, and this is very different within Orthodoxy. Just his "burn their dead" comment, while true, could drive away many. What about all the Christians who have been cremated not knowing it was not a Christian tradition, but a pagan one? Every truth needs to be expressed with the knowledge that listeners may have done that exact thing. My dad was cremated, but Jesus actually came to him when he was dying and my dad believed in Christ, and came back and told me about his vision. He died about a month later. I don't think cremation is right, it definitely wasn't good for me as a child for my dad to have made that choice, but I don't think it kept my dad out of heaven. I'm not offended, btw, but my mother might have been. I would love to visit his church if we're ever in the area. I can tell his heart is to bring people the full truth. We've lost so much in the West.
@John Coolidge Greek tradition has one icon to venerate in the vestibule, at least the one I visited. At our Serbian church, you venerate the central icon, Christ and the Theotokos icons on the iconostasis, then again go up to kiss the central icon at the end of the service, and the cross, and the priest's hand. I know Greeks kiss the cross, too, but there is a lot more of it for a Protestant to adapt to in the Slavic style. My family was really overwhelmed with all the extra bows and kissing things. In our town, the Greek church didn't have as many converts and there were people saying unkind things about their own priest (who is a convert). They did this in the vestibule, complaining he mispronounced something. They also were hard on him on Facebook about an article he sent out about Halloween from a former Satan worshippers perspective. I could just tell many were worldly and didn't want to try, just keep their Greek traditions. It was sad. The Serbian church was full of converts who really wanted to be there, and love our priest. The priest is wonderful at the other congregation, but the parishioners were not very kind. I will shop around if I have two choices. There should only be one church in America-all English, technically, if we were to be like all other Orthodox countries. If the Western Rite was offered, it would be as legitimate as Eastern Rite. St. John Maximovich vouched for it and wanted to convert people using it, right? With Serbian being my choice because I love the people and the singing, and my family thouroughly turned off by various things, I may have to be baptized and chrismated alone. I'm not sure why Orthodox people don't want people to come. Why make it as off putting as possible, and insult Protestants to their faces? It's really strange, but we all know the enemy is working overtime.
@John Coolidge It varies. My brother in law is DEFINITELY more comfortable in the Western Rite, particularly regarding how the Eucharist is distributed. We converted from Trad Catholicism, however, so we’re not bringing all the potential Protestant baggage with us. This was how Orthodox Rome did it from at least the Dialogist’s time as Pope, and it’s in our bones to do it this way for most of us. Your argument’s applicability really depends on what someone wants to be comfortable ABOUT. Believe me, they couldn’t comprehend the spoon at a Uniate liturgy, either, when we were still struggling to believe in the papal dogmas. We considered pulling a “Matt Fradd” but, the spoon was always too strange for them. I don’t mind, but that’s just how some are built. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a lack of faith, per se. They have no doubt in the Eucharist, or at least I have no reason to doubt them. They are just culturally shy of the spoon, is all.
Now, this is a guy who I think has good thoughts. I had an Eastern Orthodox friend tell me when I became Lutheran how i could be Lutheran because a tradition that came out of a dead tradition is a dead tradition. It kind of shut down the dialogue real quick
Ron, I am Eastern Orthodox but I'm a bit shocked by the tone and language used to put down Lutheranism. Having been raised and baptized in the Southern Baptist Christian community, entering into communion with Roman Catholicism while I was in college and, finally finding my home in Eastern Orthodoxy I am a great proponent of emphasizing our commonalities, which are numerous in our differences but if we can recite the Nicene- Constantinopolitan Creed together and say Amen at the end we are definitely Christian brothers and sisters Asnd as brothers and sisters
Where we disagree. The final post by OrthodoxyChloroQuine was more to my taste and in the spirit of Christian charity. You did not say which scented a Lutheran to which you belong but I have been impressed by a couple of Lutheran ministers on TH-cam. One is from the Lutheran Church of Missouri synod and the other is from the American Association of Lutheran Churches. I know there are significant differences between Lutheranism and Orthodoxy when you get into the weeds and those are significant differences. However I had very little to find issue with from Christian basics with these two Representatives of Lutheranism.
I apologize for the abominable syntax and spelling in the above posts. Please do not judge the Eastern Orthodox by inability to properly proofread the AI before I press the send button. If my senior year English teacher Miss Crater
I am glad to see/hear your pitch for mental health as there is a need for authentically Christian mental health providers. On Faithful Counseling: I’m watching this in 12/2023 and the link goes to Better Help. Please reconsider the endorsement as it is a different organization. I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian. I am a mental health counselor and trained chaplain in North Carolina. I can provide consulting and coaching across the US.
Western Rite = Latin Mass = Roman Rite = Mass of the West = Mass of Pope St. Gregory the Great = Catholic Mass able to be said by Orthodox because the theology of the Liturgy is the same when you remove accreted hostility and diatribical convinctions.
And remove “Filioque”, the first false accretion. Saint Tikhon also rehabilitated Cranmer’s Anglican mass, a far bigger challenge, but it was easier than having former Anglican priests try to Learn St Osmond’s Divine Liturgy in its pristine form. Some do, but it is the most massive form of High Mass after the Ambrosian.
Does this Western Rite Orthodox Church have the Hail Mary, Stations of the Cross add the Rosary? Does the priest drink the wine only or does he allow everyone else to drink it also? Does he use leaven or unleavened bread? Or those priests allowed to be married?
@@truckdriver8416 Western Orthodox is literally just 'hey, no pope pls.' But you don't get to therefore import the East into perennial Western customs, rites, liturgies, etc therefore. It doesn't follow. St. Paul wished all could be celibate. The West made this a requirement if you wish to be a presbyter/elder/bishop. Like it or not. If the East differs, good. But don't pretend the West just didn't exist and didn't have its own customs or rules. Did Christ hold the Passover with leavened or unleavened bread? It was literally the fest of unleavened bread on which He instituted the Eucharist. So I wouldn't exactly make that a make or break. Not that I wouldn't be against the Apsostles having instituted leavened bread for the Eucharist.. just that it's not exactly a strong argument, is it.
@@AveChristusRex well you really didn't answer my questions about Mary in the Rosary. The Russian Church wants did a sermon on the Hail Mary that I'll listen to that was really nice. The no marriage thing for the clergy was actually to keep all property and money in the coffers of the church instead of going to the children's inheritance. That's a matter of coveting quite frankly and we all see the sins of homosexuality that came out of that don't we. As for the Upper Room there were two ceremonies that took place not one. The first ceremony was a traditional Passover meal with unleavened bread. The second ceremony was the New Covenant with leavened bread. So does the Western right do the Hail Mary the Rosary and the Stations of the Cross? I figured since you claim to have gone there you would know this much appreciated a response
@@truckdriver8416 "The no marriage thing for the clergy was actually to keep all property and money in the coffers of the church instead of going to the children's inheritance. That's a matter of coveting quite frankly and we all see the sins of homosexuality that came out of that don't we." That. Or, celibacy and virginity was praised by the Fathers in general, but by St. Paul specifically, who wished "all men were as I am, [celibate]." And who taught that those who are not married can better dedicate themselves to the service of God. Think to yourself, who first comes to mind among those who ought to devote their life to the service of God? Hmmm. Who could that be? "As for the Upper Room there were two ceremonies that took place not one. The first ceremony was a traditional Passover meal with unleavened bread. The second ceremony was the New Covenant with leavened bread." This is nowhere in either Scripture or Tradition. "So does the Western right do the Hail Mary" The Hail Mary is DIRECTLY from Scripture, and the "Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners, now, and at the hour of our death" is, of course, obviously, Orthodox. Both East and West, we object to what is 'foreign' or 'not customaryin our tradition' without a good reason. You'll find a lot of things you're comfortable with come from the Fathers and we in the West are uncomfortable with. But the same applies to us: we're uncomfortable with some of the things in the Fathers that are familiar to you. If you can sing the Agni Parthene, we can sing the Memorare.
@@mariorizkallah5383 Their "Liturgy of Pope St Gregory the Great" is just the TLM according to rubrics from like the 1950s. They celebrate the feastday of Christ the King as instituted by like Pius XI or XII or something before the feast day was moved to what it is on the 1962 calendar.
This priest is a true gem. The meme, mostly online, Orthodox apologetic that is antagonistic to anything western really attracts a particular type of convert. And it does so at the expense of many open minded individuals that are interested in the truth. And he's also right that this anti-western, meme theology is rooted in the slavophile, Parisian movement, with its emphasis on eastern "distinctives."
I think it's also rooted in the fact that the main export of the West for the past 30 years has been satanic nonsense. I mean yeah, there's western rite orthodoxy, but almost only in America and really not in meaningful numbers, so it doesn't really change the picture, other than that maybe it provides a vision of something that could be revived.
It began when Doctor Joseph J Overbeck and Father Stephen Hatherly came to cross purposes in the London newspapers during the latter part of the Tractarian debates, wasting time in pitting Orthodox against Orthodox instead of uniting to focus against both Romanism and Protestantism.
I read abt a bunch of Assyrians (maybe early 20th century?)... Who were East Syriac rite Christians (Church of the East).... Who when converted to Eastern Orthodoxy, had to fully become Byzantine Rite to be "Orthodox ". Sadly. And they became Eastern Orthodox.
@@Melvin_Thoma :/. I know some aspects of the Nestorian services wouldn’t fly (“The Hallowing of Nestorius” for example), but the overall rite predates the Nestorian schism I think
Very difficult. I know a bit of the Coptic liturgy, and they have very heavy christological content at times that would need to be scrapped or changed.
Hey Austin, im kinda new to your channel, it would be super interesting if you keep making live debates such as the last, about eucharist througj baptist and catholic lens. Bring more people from different denominations to debate on one common christian doctrine, it was awesome.
9/11 today is my 29th anniversary as a convert… but the Protestant Church game me everything I needed to get here for 46 years! Glory to God! In the beginning… some converts act like X-smokers or people who just lost 40 lbs and tell you where YOUR diet is wrong and why you are FAT! Eeewwwww! Humans especially now have a bad habit of bragging. Just wait a year after 6 months of prayer and fasting kicks that ego to the ground! It takes time but that’s the point of putting Christ in the center of everything instead of ourselves.
I admire the intentions of the Western Rite movement, and I respect Fr. Patrick. Though I enjoy and support the basic ideals of this movement, I want to kindly point out its flaws, and later the solutions to those errors. -The Western rite use of statues is a Roman Catholic tradition, with no real pre-great schism origins. The style starts to be seen in its basic forms in the 11th century, a very sad century, since it marked the Great Schism. -Pre-great schism Catholicism overwhelmingly used its unique style of mosaics, mozarabic and italo-byzantine iconography, and regional variants of two-dimensional Christian artwork. Solution: Revive these old forms of two-dimensional iconography, particularly italo-byzantine, Mozarabic, and mosaics. Causes of this error: most western-rite orthodox are roman Catholic converts, and so mistake the roman catholic art for pre-great Schism Catholic art.
I read somewhere that some byzantine churches (and present day Greek ones) also had statues. Honestly, why does Orthodoxy have to adhere solely to the byzantine aesthetic? Ethiopian churches have their own iconography that differs from the byzantine style.
@@MrSofuskroghlarsen We do have statues, I never made any claim against that. The intention and rule of the western rite is to look like a pre-great schism parish. Therefore, they need far more icons than statues. Ethiopian iconography is acceptable and accurate.
@@MrSofuskroghlarsen We do not use only byzantine style iconography. I don't know why you got that impression. Russian iconography is different, and so is arabic/Antiochian iconography.
@@MrSofuskroghlarsenBaroque iconography is permissible in Orthodoxy so long as it does not stray from church teaching. There are lots of Ortho churches in Serbia for example with Baroque icons.
The Longer Catechism of the Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Church AKA the Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow literally, explicitly teaches that there is “a fund [i.e. treasury] of infinite merit”. By the way, did you know that the distribution of indulgences is an Eastern Orthodox practice, being legalized at the Great Council of Constantinople of 1727, which taught: “The power of the abandonment of sins, which, if filed in writing, which the Eastern Church of Christ calls ‘permissive letters’, and the Latin people "indulgences" is given by Christ in the holy Church. These ‘permissive letters’ are issued throughout the catholic Church by the four holiest patriarchs: Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem." It is not forbidden nor condemned, the only thing forbidden about them is selling for profit, besides that is completely normal, legal and traditional. Moreover, they were taught by Dositheos of Jerusalem who wrote "It is an established custom and ancient tradition, known to all, that the Most Holy Patriarchs give the absolution certificate to the faithful people they have granted them from the beginning and still do." Your St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite who, being the author of "The Rudder" knew Orthodox practices as well as probably almost anyone at the time he lived, wrote a letter to Paisius, Bishop of Stagonas, asking him to obtain an absolution certificate (which the 1727 Council identifies as an indulgence) for a monk in his monastery. Decree 18 of the Confession of Dositheos speaks of something very similar to Purgatory, the people who repented from Mortal sins, but have not had any fruit of repentence, can be delivered from punishment by things that include "the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed". How would you distinguish between what is mentioned in the Confession to what was taught by the Catholic Church at 2nd Lyons, Florence and Trent?
@John Coolidge I. The Constantinople Council of 1727 says the 4 Eastern Patriarchs, not just the Patriarch of Jerusalem, have approved and authorized Indulgences, which they call Certificates of Absolution, “The power of the forgiveness of sins, which is termed by the Eastern Church of Christ Absolution Certificates when given in writing, but by the Latins Indulgences, is given to the Holy Church by Christ. These Absolution Certificates are issued in the whole Catholic Church by the four most holy Patriarchs: Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem." This was cited in the OP. Two things are clear from the Eastern Orthodox Synod… (a) the Synod considers absolution certificates to be the same as what Latin Catholics call Indulgences, as shown by the words, "The power of the forgiveness of sins, which is termed by the Eastern Church of Christ Absolution Certificates when given in writing, but by the Latins Indulgences, is given to the Holy Church by Christ." (b) These absolution certificates are considered universal within the Eastern Orthodox Church: “These Absolution Certificates are issued in the whole Catholic Church by the four most holy Patriarchs: Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem" note the words "the whole Catholic Church" i.e. whole Orthodox Eastern Church. II. Patriarch Dositheus confessed this doctrine in an Eastern Orthodox Council in the 17th Century, "And the souls of those involved in mortal sins, who have not departed in despair but while still living in the body, though without bringing forth any fruits of repentance, have repented - by pouring forth tears, by kneeling while watching in prayers, by afflicting themselves, by relieving the poor, and finally by showing forth by their works their love towards God and their neighbor, and which the Catholic Church has from the beginning rightly called satisfaction - [their souls] depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from there, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed; especially the unbloody Sacrifice benefiting the most; which each offers particularly for his relatives that have fallen asleep, and which the Catholic and Apostolic Church offers daily for all alike. Of course, it is understood that we do not know the time of their release. We know and believe that there is deliverance for such from their direful condition, and that before the common resurrection and judgment, but when we know not." From: www.crivoice.org/creeddositheus.html III. If there is a distinction in Hades between those (1) who can be saved, and those (2) who cannot be saved, well what else is (1) but Hell proper, and what else is (2) but a kind of purgatorial purification state? For if they can be released, it is obvious they are capable of being sanctified, and we call such sanctification Purgatorial. When this was discussed between Latin and Greek Theologians at the Council of Florence, the Catholic Church assured the Orthodox that nothing else had been dogmatically defined but that (1) a Purgatorial state exists and that (2) the souls detained there can be assisted by the suffrage gained by the Faithful. In most of the early Church, there were two views, based on St. Paul's teaching that some would be saved through fire in 1 Cor 3. Either (1) all would be saved through fire, and then we have universalism, as apparently in St. Gregory of Nyssa, or (2) only some, for lesser sins, would be saved through fire, as appears in another St. Gregory, the great Pope of Rome. So if Purgatory is not true, Universalism would be.
@John Coolidge The modern Eastern Orthodox deny purgatory, but are rather inconsistent in their way of putting forth its belief. Because in church history, you’ll see different articulations of purgatory. Sometimes different names to describe it even, in the east and the west. Here’s how Eastern Orthodox metropolitan, Kallistos Ware, describes the current state of orthodoxy on the question of purgatory. He writes: “Orthodox are convinced that Christians here on earth have a duty to pray for the departed. And, they are confident that the dead are helped by such prayers. But, precisely in what way do our prayers help the dead? What exactly is the condition of souls in the period between death and the resurrection of the body at the last day. Here, Orthodox teaching is not in entirely clear and has varied somewhat at different times. In the 17th century, a number of Orthodox writers, most notably Peter of Mogila and Dositheos in his confession upheld the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory, or something very close to it.” This is evident in the 1672 Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem. And, it said the following about purgatory, very close to the Catholic view. “The souls of the departed are either at rest or in torment, according to their conduct in life. But, their condition will not be perfect till the resurrection of the body. The souls of those who die in a state of penitence without having brought forth fruits of repentance or satisfactions, depart into Hades. And, there, they must suffer the punishment for their sins. But, they may be delivered by the prayers of the priests and the alms, or giving to the poor, of their kindred. Especially, by the unbloody sacrifice of the mass, which individuals offer for their departed relatives, and which the Catholic and apostolic church daily offers for all alike. The liberation from this intervening state of purification will take place before the resurrection and the general judgment. But, the time is unknown.” In another word, Kallistos Ware says this. “It is true that Orthodox theologians usually express reservations about the doctrine of purgatory as developed in medieval and post medieval Roman Catholic teaching. But, at the same time, most of them allow for some sort of purging or purification after death. Catholic and Orthodox views on the middle state after death are less sharply opposed than appears at first.” P.S. Are you a Protestant convert?
@John Coolidge So does Fr. Josiah Trentham have more authority than an council of Eastern Orthodox patriarchs of 4 of the most ancient sees? Who gave him the authority to speak on behalf of all of Orthodoxy?
@@dexteradomini7103 amen brother ! I was EO and saw how modern orthodoxy is not really how orthodoxy was back then and after finding out Council of Florence I could not deny Rome
Austin, I was checking out your merch, nice selection. I have heard the saying, a Theologian is one who prays; one who prays is a Theologian. I wondered if you would consider sharing with your audience about your own practice of prayer. Alternatively, maybe an interview/episode on prayer, perhaps from different Christian practices, such as from Orthodox perspective, Catholic, Protestant, etc. Just a thought triggered by the Theologian merch. Keep up the good work spreading rhe good news. 👍
As someone interested in Orthodoxy (tentatively) but depressed to find I truly live at a ridiculous distance from any Orthodox Parish, also being a proud Anglo-American who might actually be sympathetic to the Orthodox Way (a shame nobody could've reached out during the Reformation in Britain methinks) who just isn't about to LARP being Oriental (not going to trade one for another) this interests me greatly! Would love to know more.
The impression I've gotten is that the jury is still out on whether or not Orthodoxy at large embraces the legitimacy of a Western form -- due to the fact that "Western" implies not only a Latin-Rite based Liturgy but also a tacit acceptance of the development of Western Theology/Soteriology (also they often seem to be ex-Anglicans, not always, but there is a trend). But as far as I'm concerned it's as much a positive reality as Uniate Catholicism; expanding our understanding of how particular expressions of each faith tradition can coincide is a godly endeavor.
The jury has already settled it. It is completely valid and accepted by the Church. The only opposition you find comes from lay internet members "some refer to them as OrthodoxBros" that are ignorant on the subject matter. Also, the faith/theology isn't different compared to the eastern rites. You may find a western rite orthodox pray the rosary but they believe exactly the same as anyone in the eastern Churches.
@John Coolidge It's been slightly modified, but the nuts and bolts are the same. If you are interested or just want to compare, I recommend the Saint Ambrose Prayer book. It is a much better resource than myself. It has everything in it "rosary beads aside"
@John Coolidge Well, without debating when the Rosary originated, the Latins were using beads for the BVM. Those were essentially rosaries without being explicit rosaries. The main thing to examine though is the spirit of the practice. There are various things that occurred in the west post schism that the east does fully/would fully embrace as Orthodox. Not all things from the Roman Catholic Church is bad. The Church, including the eastern Churches, view the WRO Rosary as Orthodox.
I read this from The website of my friend's church where they practice the Western Rite, and thought it was good to share... "We believe papal heresy, theological and liturgical innovation, has removed the Latin Church from the center of uninterrupted Apostolic Deposit, So we do not consider ourselves in communion with the Roman Catholicism or seek recognition from the Roman Catholic Church. While Western in our liturgical expression, culture and language, We are fully orthodox in our theology, rejecting the Filioque, Papal Supremacy, Universal Jurisdiction, Infallibility, The Roman definition of the Immaculate Conception, And all the Protestant heresies that resulted from the West's departure from the Ancient, Apostolic, Catholic Faith"
I have a question, and this is just based off my limited experience. I go to church on Easter, and people prostrate before an icon of Jesus in the tomb. My friend prostrates before Baba's icon before leaving the temple. How is the veneration of iconography different between what I've seen at church, and what I've seen at temple?
The process is the same. The difference is the One being venerated. Jesus is God. The others in pagan religions are idols and false teachers. It is always about who is being venerated.
From OCA website: Question How does the Orthodox Church view cremation? Answer The Church does not condemn cremation outright, provided that there is a valid reason for it. In Japan, for example, the state requires cremation, and this extends to Orthodox Christians. There have also been exceptions made in cases of epidemics or fear of disease, for various reasons. There can also be reasonable cause for permitting cremation, but in general the image of the body being buried as it awaits the resurrection is more in keeping with the image given to us by Christ, Who likens burial with the planting of seed which later blossoms into a living plant.
I feel like I vacillate between Western Rite Orthodoxy & Byzantine Rite Catholicism in my heart, and then there's my occasional affinity to the Continuing Anglican Movement, the SSPX & the Personal Ordinariate...man, it's hard to find a theological home, but oh so easy to know which versions of Christianity you wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole, these days.
I wanted to point out that almost every Roman church in my region for the last 100+ years has had an icon of Our Mother of Perpetual Help in it. I live in the USA. If I remember correctly, Romans are not allowed to cremate either except by a form of dispensation for grave reasons and they also cannot hold a funeral with the ashes. Sorry, but Father is mistaken. They'll have to do a memorial Mass only. I would go with the obsession with apparitions as not keeping with the faith over cremation if we're picking a point, personally. OCA takes the same stance as the RCs, as someone in the comments pointed out!
In my observations. The WR is an appeal to High Church Protestants and Trad Catholics. People who already have a Liturgical Understanding and a familiarity of the Rite of St. Tikhon/St. Gregory. Low Church Protestants and Novus Ordo Catholics will just jump straight to Russian/Greek Liturgical Traditions and openly embrace it. The AWRV and the ROCOR WR are so few and far between, with ROCOR being very Zealous about strangeness creeping in and "Byzantifying" Parishes. There's more than one issue I personally have with the expression of Piety within the WR but that's not for me to correct. With the loss of Met. Joseph and Met. Tikhon there are few in Antioch and ROCOR that support the WR.
Fr. Patrick, What a lovely gentleman. May God Grant you and Austin Many Years. There is no “Eastern” in Orthodoxy, period. It is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church that simply survived the “sin of Schism” in the East and that accident of History shouldn’t be held against it today because there is no Culture in the Liturgy unless you make it so regardless of what language it is offered in. But!, unfortunately what you have is a lingering but diminishing flavor of sometimes vehement ethnic defenders. “This is a Greek Church why is there a Russian cross here?” But I have never found a priest from any tradition to be one. I’m a Mormon raised Catholic educated convert to Orthodoxy and have found a home for 35 years in the Orthodox Church. Our current church serves, Greeks, Romanians, Arabs, Eritrean, Hispanic, Ukrainians and me along with numerous other converts nearly seamlessly. The Serbian Bishop of Western America comes frequently and we welcomed the entire neighboring Russian Church when the Icon of the Theotokos from St. Tikhons Monastery visited. I see no difference in Latin traditions than any of the other cultures, languages of any other Orthodox Tradition. Orthodox has never so narrowly defined itself, but make no mistake the boundaries are firm and well defined and every tradition acknowledged by the Patriarchs as honoring those boundaries should be accepted without reservation or any asterisks whatsoever but as complete, equal and fully Orthodox. But likewise as any guest in anyone’s home we should be respectful of our hosts. That’s to say if you are welcomed as you are to say a Greek Church built by Greeks and attended by Greeks for decades or longer don’t enter it with intent to remove the ethnic components to it. That’s simple politeness and after all none of it is directed at you even though some may be more welcoming than others but isn’t that just life. However none of that slack should be extended to Clergy. If Clergy aren’t welcoming openly based on ethnicity they are neither serving Christ or his Church.
1:14:10 he completely denies enculturation. This is an ASTRONOMICALLY huge issue. The westerners may have the western rite, Indians the saint Thomas, what are you offering to Nigerians, Congolese, Fijians, Maasai, Chinese or Malays? And that is putting aside the multicultural and ethnic nature of America for one second. This is myopic Anglo self importance, takes one to know one. He complains about the liturgy changing the “cult” culture… THATS THE POINT. And no, that won’t make you a nebulous “eastern” (dramatically different cultures for the record) it will make the culture Orthodox.
I don't think you heard him correctly. He's not talking about cultus as in the culture of a country. He refers to the environment people are spiritually nourished - the western rites are equal to the eastern ones in that regard, Pope St Leo, Pope St Gregory, St Ambrose, St Hilary, St Augustine, St Oswald, St Alban, St Dunstan - all these saints of the church and many many many more were raised and spiritually nourished by solely the western rite. That alone means that East and West are both equal in that regard, so why not want to bring that theological equality to the fore by endorsing the Western Rite, its the liturgy of the Latin Patristic patronage, which again, produced countless Saints of the Church so naturally its something we should desire more of. Its nothing about enculturation if anything he probably (though ill not speak as if I know what he wants!) WANTS enculturation, the significant amount of Orthodox Churches in the US are ran by GOARCH who, while I know many I deeply admire and respect in GOARCH, has a strong 'hellenistic' attitude with very little evangelism going on. The view of Orthodoxy being based along national lines and being cultural club isn't something people hear about for absolutely zero reasoning. If people historically grew up around a Western Liturgical life then suddenly are thrust into an Eastern Liturgical life, which differs quite a bit in their emphasis, its only natural that many people can be and indeed are put off by these foreign practices. They're foreign and people genuinely, whether it's right or wrong, don't like to stick their necks into something foreign to them all of a sudden.
Austin you should look into using zencastr at least for your audio. With zencastr the audio is recorded locally so if you or your guest has a connection issue the audio quality for the finished production isn't degrated or lost. Love your work hope this helps keep the quality of your content high
Fr Patrick said he had to be Russian or Greek due to the sin of the schism. I would say it's the same answer for a Catholic as well. Although there are Eastern Catholic churches in the US, I know many eastern Catholics who attend Latin Catholic parishes just because they are more widely available and close by. The eastern chruches are smaller and a nearest parish could be far way. And 98-99% of Catholics are Latin. So even many Catholics have to be Western/Latin for the most part even tho they are eastern. Plus altho Byzantine Catholic churches are traditional ("eastern"), many of the other eastern rite churches are heavily latinized.
I got kicked out of Dyercord for defending Western devotional practices against Easterns. I think a lot of Easterns in the US are former Protestants. They get the benefit of an ancient apostolic communion while still being able to hate Rome and the West.
Being one who is currently in a "year of considering the East", Fr. Cardine had me near convinced until he started using an illustration that seems to imply that the Eastern Church is without flaw. I cannot abide a tradition that teaches it's tradition and structure is inerrant.
Im not sure if I understood correctly but the father saying that the Catholics don’t fast is just not true. In fact we are currently in the period of fasting for 40 days.
I love the western rite and am for it existing but I grow tired of the apologists for it insisting that following the traditional Constantinopolitan ("Byzantine") rite somehow means you are pretending to be a Greek or a Russian. It's misguided at best, and disingenuous at worst. The ritual is not ethnic and the case for it being ethnic cannot be made as the "Byzantine" rite has been practiced by a plurality of ethnicities for many centuries and unlike Americans today none of these people were confused about their ethnicity or identity, and most modern western converts to orthodoxy do not share this strange confusion of identity. If you go to a Russian parish and it feels foreign it may be because most of the people there are foreign immigrants and just different than you, sure. But what about when they're all American converts including the priest? What's the cope then? If the ritual feels foreign it's because of historical development and that Roman Catholic history is removed from this tradition after the schism, and Protestant history and tradition is even further removed and many Protestants today do not even have the concept of liturgy.
I go to a Greek parish that is probably 70-80% converts and I have never felt out of place participating in the services. Most if it is done in English and certain prayers are done in multiple languages like the Lord's Prayer. I don't necessarily see an issue with Western Rite but in my experience don't fully understand the need for it either.
To be honest, Western orhodox rite liturgy is one of the greatest liturgical and theological messes i have ever witnesses, blindly removed traditions and prayers of latin liturgy, sprinkled in eastern prayer practises, but what killed me was the tribule (censer) with the bells, For someone brought with both eastern and western rites (having dominicans, latin rite, copts, greek and russian orthodox) it was out of place as a monstrance on a football match
Imagine if there was some hierarchy which could approve or disapprove the same way except when bishops made requests almost like a head of the church on earth when bishops can’t go directly to Jesus for approval
I've felt that the existence of western rite you can see the diffrence between little t and big T traditions enough to know the diffrence between the theological truth of the orthodox faith and the theologically influenced practices of the orthodox church
Western rite Orthodoxy conforms more closely to the classic definition of uniatism as a ritual adjunct of a particular Church, than do the Eastern Catholic Churches today, which not only possess true autonomy and ecclesial status, but also have been enjoined to recover the fullness of their authentic Tradition--in contrast to the Western rite communities, which have been subjected to a process of "byzantinization" in the form of additions to their liturgy such as a consecratory epiclesis and a Byzantine-style pre-communion prayer. In light of this, it's hard to take Orthodox criticism of uniatism with a straight face.
These are usually modified Western Rites. They are not 100% Western. That actually makes sense because the Orthodox churches are mostly based in the East.
@@roytofilovski9530 And that is precisely the argument that the Orthodoxy made against the heavily latinized Greek Catholics of the pre-Vatican II period---that we were only superficially Orthodox, but internally Roman Catholics. And, at the time, that may have been the case, though even before Vatican II, that mindset was changing. Since Vatican II--and especially in the past two decades, Greek Catholics have more fully embraced their authentic Tradition, the same Tradition maintained by the Eastern Orthodox. The Second Vatican Council recognized the identity of the Greek Catholics (and all the other Eastern Catholic Churches) as true Churches, with their own autonomous hierarchy, liturgy, spirituality, theology, doctrine and discipline. This makes them fundamentally different from "Western rite Orthodoxy", which is NOT organized as true particularly Churches, but as mere ritual adjuncts or "rites" of an Eastern Orthodox Church. The do not have an independent hierarchy, nor are they free to theologize in its own (Western) Tradition, and its liturgies have been bowdlerized to accommodate Eastern Orthodox sensibilities (e.g., with the inclusion of an explicit consecratory epiclesis, and the addition or Orthodox-style pre-communion prayers). They are, in shore, the Orthodox equivalent of "Uniates", although we "Uniates" are far more independent and authentic than Western rite Orthodoxy. Which, of course, puts lie to all the calumnies that too frequently are directed against Greek Catholics by ill-informed members of Eastern Orthodox Churches.
@@StuartKoehl WR Orthodox do not want to be independent, so frankly I don't get your point tbh. And Greek Catholics are not Orthodox, they are Catholic......
@@roytofilovski9530 There are only about 2500 Russian Greek Catholics, and an equal number of Hellenic Catholics. Numbers are not important, but ecclesial status is. That was the whole argument against "uniatism"--that they weren't true Churches, merely rites whose liturgy, theology, spirituality, doctrine and discipline were all deeply influenced by their mother Church. Now, we Greek Catholics look to the Orthodox as our Mother Churches, and back to them, one day, we hope to return.
I am curious what Fr. Patrick meant when he compared the western view of treasury of merits vs the eastern view of merits. Very curious what the difference is!
Since I learned about Western Rite, I have to say that on the one hand I think it makes sense to have a rite which is indigenous to the West and which reflects the West's lost Orthodoxy. On the other hand though, the reintroduction of the Sarum Rite in Orthodox circles is a modern development as far as I know, and I'm afraid that it might be aimed too much at poaching Catholics who may have a temporary disagreement with their church or at introducing Latin Christianity to the Orthodox. This is why I can't wait for this video and to see what I might learn from it!
Yeah that is my critique of the WR. Since it seems that the WR doesn’t have a organic concrete history that is from a western heritage that Latin Rite Catholics can claim. It can seem from someone from the outside that the WR came from the hierarchy with just eastern heritage only. An analogy would be: suppose that the Catholic Church was only composed of the Latin Church and no Eastern Catholic Churches. One day Rome decides to allow/support Catholics by adopting and modifying an Eastern Liturgy that was once Catholic, but were corrupted by the Orthodox. So we have This Eastern Catholic Church that doesn’t have a eastern heritage.
@ScottishSlav(formerly Ed of the Dead) I think the distinction between WR and the Uniates that can be made is: The Uniates were former Orthodox that entered into Communion with Rome, thus they came from an eastern heritage and continued that eastern heritage. Not Catholics that came from a western heritage. The Uniates would be like if the entire patriarchate of Constantinople entered back into union with Rome, or a Bishop and his diocese. Rome didn’t have Catholics establish an Eastern Rite Catholic Church that came from an Western heritage. The eastern Catholics came from an eastern heritage, and not from a western heritage. Hence why they are not under Latin bishops, but their own eastern bishops and canon laws. While the WR came from Eastern hierarchy, and who are still under eastern bishops. Which can seem that we have eastern bishops just claiming another heritage that is different than their own for those orthodox who prefer the western liturgy. It seems odd from a historical standpoint.
@@baoduong2203The Maronites were never Eastern Orthodox. They are 2000 years in unbroken communion with Rome. Besides, there are “uniates” that came to the Church not only from the (Greek/Byzantine) Eastern Orthodox world in schism, but also came from the Assyrian Church of the East (like Syro-Malabar Catholics and Chaldean Catholics) or Oriental Orthodoxy (like Malankara Indian Catholics and Ethiopian Catholics).
I myself became RC after 8 years of trying to deal with EO peculiarities. Eventually, the anti-west attitude was too much (and frankly anti-Christian). I later saw that this hatred resulted in denying the faith to-own-the-Latins; I am now much more comfortable in RC theology, so I owe them that.
What is this attitude in Orthodoxy that you can call anti-Christian?at least I can imagine what you mean by talking about anti-Western relations, but I also can't understand how you didn't see it as a fight against sin, sinful politics, etc. I live in Russia, and all that can be heard in the Orthodox Church are words like that Western Christian civilization has lost its Christianity, with references to today's agenda, culture, and ideology. And I would like to ask you how you reconciled with the infallibility of the pope and the changed symbol of faith. Sorry in advance if there are errors here (used a translator)
Dude, you've been peddling this lie for over a year now. No Orthodox Parish community speaks this way. No Orthodox Priest or Bishop would tell you our faith is inherently anti-western. If you really did convert for a time your story would indicate you spent more time learning the faith from internet edgelords and not a Parish Priest. Which is a spiritual delusion in of itself.
@@БондарьВСеволод Not everything in the west is orthodox Catholic (Roman or otherwise) practice. The condemnation of the Roman church isn’t merely sin. It’s about fighting a strawman to inflate the EO ego.
For me I do like orthodoxy, but really love many of the western pre-schism saints, especially on the British isles (Cuthbert, David of Wales, Thaney, Nonnita, Bede, Ita, etc…).Even some after 1095(St Francis). Love God, Love others. Change the world.😉
Bought Augustine’s City of God, confessions (per Fr Seraphim Rose’s praise for the books), and the consolation of philosophy by Boethuis. Look forward to reading them.
@@cameron4339 “The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!”” 1 Corinthians 12:21 NIV
@@davidvartanian indeed, there is only one church not a "invisable church" Christ made it clear that their is a visable church, Christ is the head of the church (Colossians 2:13-18) if the church was invisable only well their is no reason to correct mormons or Jw's, or other denominations, Matthew 7:22 states Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?" God does care what you believe, if he did not he would be counterdicting himself
@@cameron4339 “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” Colossians 2:16-17 NIV
Does anyone know which western liturgy (mass) does the orthodox western rite perform? I would think it would be a pre-schism liturgy (mass), and specifically not a post 1570 Tridentine mass approved by Pope Pius V?
It would be fun to bring an Eastern Catholic priest and a Western Orthodox priest to talk to each other
Great idea!
Western Orthodoxy works differently than Eastern Catholicism. EC have their own dogmas, contrary to the Latin church. Western Orthodoxy retains the same dogmas as their mother Church jurisdiction.
@@eliyahutavas As a Byzantine Catholic seminarian I can tell you that is not true.
@@themorbidmole9247 Is it not true that “Byzantine Rite Catholics” often venerate St. Gregory Palamas, a man anathematized as a “heretic” by the Roman Rite crowd?
@@brotheraugustine Palamas was not anathematized by the Roman church. Barlaam's criticism of him hardly qualifies as an official anathema from the Romans. Palamas is a regional Saint to our church. He hasn't been canonized officially by the Roman church but, just like the various orthodox churches, there are numerous saints exclusive to local churches. I'm not trying to argue, just telling the guy above that we are doctrinally Catholic, not Orthodox and we don't pretend to be otherwise.
I was blessed to grow up in an "eastern rite" orthodox parish with a priest who was very sympathetic towards the Christian West. He incorporated practices like: chanting the O Antiphons during Advent; reading the traditional proclamation of the Birth of Christ from the Roman Martyrology on Christmas Eve; singing many beloved carols of Western origin around Christmas; teaching us about many pre-schism Western saints; and including information about Western liturgical practices at different points during the liturgical year so we could compare and contrast with what we did. Wherever there was common ground to be found, he brought it to light. I dont remember him ever denigrating the West. I'm very thankful to have been formed by someone humble enough to call out the goodness in what he saw, no matter its origin. As a last thought I'd like to say that this approach is truly Orthodox. As St. Paisios taught, we should be like bees who seek out nectar, and not like flies who are attracted to trash. Austin, thanks for another great interview!
I can't wait for this!!! I've attended Fr. Patrick's parish for a good number of months. It's amazing. It helped me learn and accept the Western Rite completely.
Hope you enjoy it!
love it!
Being a member of a club cannot save you, nor any fake rite or tradition!
@@nyagolnyagolov7130 Thank God we're not part of any club but of His Church.
@@no_more_anymore You are a part of the Apostate church - the club of the duped and you have nothing to thank GOD Almighty - (Yehovah Tzveot) for that! The sooner you realize it, the sooner you will turn to the Saviour - Lord Jesus Christ, not to fake manmade rites and traditions accumulated since the 4th century! Even the bible you are reading if you do so, is falsely translated on purpose, to justify fake doctrines of men, not GOD's ones!
This was such a wonderful interview. Father Patrick has a very humble and loving approach, while still holding to his convictions. He touched on a lot of questions I've had, and mentioned multiple things that I myself have noticed but not been able to make sense of in the Western versus Eastern dichotomy, as a new convert to Orthodoxy. Also, blessed feast day to Father Patrick!
I am Roman Catholic and I really appreciated Father's critique of "Lack of fasting and burning the dead." I have terminal cancer and my wife wants me cremated, but I follow the old Catholic belief in burial. Thanks again for a wonderful interview, Austin, and God bless both you and Father Patrick.
Praying for your healing 🙏
Will be praying for you!
As a Catholic, I must say Eastern Orthodoxy’s perception of cremation is missing some core knowledge of Catholic theology so as to get into the honest dialogue. It is NOT implied in the theology of the body and/or the theology of the ressurrection that the deceased body has to be in perfect/undamaged state so as for the faithful to attain resurrection with a glorious perfected body, but the very action of the omnipotent God, in the power of the Holy Spirit, will bring those who resurrect from the dead to glory in the outcome of their bodies despite any of the current limitations. Glorified bodies have some characteristics like impassibilty, subtlety, agility and clarity. I’m not really expanding those explanations, but if a man does not have an arm and a leg he won't resurrect with those defects, either congenital or acquired through life, but as in the perfect “vessel for the Spirit” under the compatible means that assured the flourishment of his soul, of course, but only with a glorious form that will express the incorporation into the Mystical Body of Christ in the glorified Lord.
The sempiternal prohibition of the Church concerning deceased bodies refers to 1) desecration, 2) profanation, 3) defilement and 4) violation of the human body due to its intrinsic inalienable value. The Ancient Greek perception of burials - hugely influential into Byzantine Christian culture - is represented by the pagan prohibition to leave dead bodies behind in war fields without a funeral as an offense to the gods of the ‘Polis’ like what we see in the very essential discussion inside “Antigone” (Sophocles play). So it’s not that straightforward to simply say bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and nothing more. A document issued by the Catholic Church in 1963 said cremation wasn't opposed “per se” to Christian religion if it doesn’t come to be made or justified for reasons contrary to Christian doctrine, with further specifications. That’s the core point. So under necessity of times (gigantic mass murders, pandemic, World Wars, deaths by forced starvation, poverty and misery), which means under particular conditions (many of them couldn’t clearly be thought of before), burials received formal canonical treatment and cremations were thought to be not ‘a priori’ an act of desecration/profanation, that means, not forbidden in themselves. Notice cremation was not stimulated but discouraged; it was not made an option available but it was said to be admissible under some circunstancial STRICT necessities. And it wasn’t made morally equivalent to burials; even in the hypothesis admissible, cremations were determined to happen according to sacred funerals norms as said by the Catholic Church.
In some Oriental religions death is seen as a transition from one form of matter to another, which is an absurd for a Christian to engage in. So it is of course forbidden to engage in on those because a pantheist cremation _”was chosen for reasons contrary to Christian doctrine”_ (Code of Canon Law, can. 1176 § 3; cf. CCEC, can. 876 § 3). And the Church is the guardian of the Christian doctrines and the Church is the one that can permit or forbid disciplines in order to maintain the very integrity and integrality of those doctrines.
That’s clear for a more educated Catholic. But the Church always emphatically recommends the burial of the dead as proper means to deal with the deceased and she STILL DOES, which doesn’t invalidate the fact that some people simply can’t even afford to own - without compromising their means of subsistence - burial places for them or their family, which would maybe imply the need to bury or be buried in public desecrated spaces if they do not want to be treated as indigent and many of these places simply demand cremation due to the lack of geographical space or due to lack of sanitary means in many cities and regions in the globe. Probably most of us won’t have any idea about what extreme poverty means. I sense some of us - well fed and created with all material luxuries one can get - do not really understand what the world is and how few the ones who could have an authentic Christian burial are. The point is not so much the burial (by the way, the Egyptian Pharaoh was a pagan monarch and had a careful/solemn burial) but the Christian funeral. The Catholic Church is UNIVERSAL and the Church extends from one extreme to the other of the globe and she comforts the poorest of the poorest in areas in which people would need to succeed a lot in order to be even named “poor”. The Catholic Church is never provincial, either geographically or culturally.
More objectively speaking: the Church authorized cremation NOT under the mere preference of families but under some conditions (any violation of this would be equivalent to unchristian treatment of the deceased) which are the following:
1) it would be asserted that _“cremation, in and of itself, objectively negates neither the Christian doctrine of the soul’s immortality nor that of the resurrection of the body”,_ and it only would be admissible if by sanitary, economic or social considerations (Cf. Holy Office, Instruction Piam et costantem, 5 July 1963: AAS 56 [1964] 822);
2) it must never violate the explicitly stated or the reasonably inferable wishes of the deceased faithful (idem);
3) and it is never authorized to happen in any appearance of pantheism or nihilism or _“to scatter the ashes of the faithful departed in the air, on land, at sea or in some other way, nor may they be preserved in mementos, pieces of jewelry or other objects”,_ and if that is implied, _"the Christian funeral must be denied to that person according to the norms of the law"_ (Code of Canon Law, can. 1184; CCEO, can.876, § 3).
Please check the Instruction “Ad resurgendum cum Christo” regarding the burial of the deceased and the conservation of the ashes in the exceptional case of cremation.
In ANY cases, _“the ashes of the faithful must be laid to rest in a SACRED place, that is, in a cemetery or, in certain cases, in a church or an area which has been set aside for this purpose, and so dedicated by the competent ecclesial authority”_ (Ad resurgendum cum Christo, CDF, 2016). And if someone has the means to be buried witout cremation, he is morally required to do so.
The Catholic Church doesn’t make rules that fit how wordly desires are seen in the latest fashion. That’s just a terrible ideological prejudice that those in schism with us got used to have in their pockets. I’m not saying Eastern Orthodoxy’s mistreatment of Catholic discipline of burials is resultant of bad faith, but it seems to miss the astonishing complexity of the themes discussed, definitely.
I’m praying for your healing, brother! 🙏 May God give you the honor to always be with His presence until the definitive encounter yet reestablish your health in the flesh as for now.
God bless you and your family!
@a Wow, the Catholic Church must surrender!
@@masterchief8179 Too long, didn't read + you're a heretic. The part with "the ashes of the faithful must be laid to resr in a SACRED place...." defeats all your other arguments.
Thanks for another interesting video, Austin. I've recently been reading up on Western Rite Orthodoxy after a Western Rite Orthodox parish was founded in my area, which really piqued my interest. As always your video showed up exactly when I needed it.
You're a great soldier for Christ, helping us Christians to better understand one another. Much love to you and all our Christian brothers and sisters out there. God bless.
This might be long-winded, but I felt compelled to share and so I apologize in advance.
There was a lot I sympathized with in Fr. Patrick's story, and stuff him and I have talked about myself as I have met him in person like many others and attended his parish several times myself. Ultimately my family and I decided it would be best for us in ROCOR (we ourselves are converts from Catholicism, first Roman to Eastern Catholic, and now to Holy Orthodoxy), but like Fr. Patrick, and others, I still have a heart for the Western Tradition, at least Pre-Schism, and agree that there is definitely an unhealthy level of Anti-Westernism in, particularly, the American variety, of Orthodoxy.
With that said, however, I also think there are very really problems in modes of thinking, theology, and praxis that cannot be ignored and are problematic. I think Orthodox can validly critique what we might call "errors of the West" without characterizing it as all "unmitigated darkness". One of the biggest things that aided my conversion to Orthodoxy was, quite simply, the repeated recognition of Catholic scholars like Fr. Yves Congar, or Edward Scienskei (who became Orthodox), or even the Vatican's own theological commissions (like the Chieti Document or the Clarification on the Filioque) that basically conceded (implicitly, if not explicitly in some cases) to Orthodox positions.
Fr. Yves Congar in his "900-Years After the Schism" himself notes that a 4th century Western Christian would be at home in an 11th century Western church, but that an 11th century Western Christian would not feel the same in a 12th century church. The fact of the matter is that we can deliberately, precisely, and definitively point to theological and psychological changes in the West, particularly post-schism, that changed the trajectory of that particular tradition. If Fr. Congar is just talking 4th cent to 12th cent, I think you can just as well apply it from 12th or 13th cent to 15th or 16th cent and from there to the Post-Vatican 1 and Post-Vatican 2 Roman church. I sincerely believe at this point that St. Augustine (or St. Gregory the Great or St. Bede the Venerable) would not recognize the 12th cent church and subsequently Aquinas with the Baroque church and the people of that era with the modern Roman Church, and if that is the case we should all be seriously ask ourselves "Why?" and what that means for the West and the Roman Church.
If you look at Western churches in France during the Carolingian period or Germany in the Ottonian period, or in Anglo-Saxon England before the Norman conquest it is scarily similar to the art, architecture, and sacramental reality, and vision, of the East. Churches were covered in painted iconography and mosaic and usually following canonical conventions in the East, even a lot of the hagiography sounds similar. Richard Rohlin and Jonathan Pageau in their Universal History series have talked about how almost identical Irish Hagiography is in literary style and tropes to Byzantine hagiography. However, this begins to change, for example, when Charlemagne calls the Council of Frankfurt in the 8th century that actually condemns the 7th Ecumenical Council and Iconography. It's just a hop and a skip from that to the rise of Gothic architecture in the 11th century that represents a very different cosmological vision of the Church and is a break from the previous generations. As Fr. Patrick rightly pointed out you did not have this happen in Italy (which I have been to and can attest to myself) and that is likely because the Italian church (and Rome) never accepted or promulgated the Frankfurt Council and had much more congenial contact with the East, particularly because of the heavy Byzantine influence in Southern Italy (obviously that changed in the following centuries).
Also, something that always irks me is the statue conversation. I don't think Orthodox or Catholics really understand this point well. 3D art is not the issue as such. Like Fr. Patrick noted there are religious statues in Russia (I've seen quite a few when I was there) and in Byzantium, among other 3Dish forms of art. However, there is a massively vast different between the sort of static and simply statuary of Late Antiquity/Early/High Middle Ages, and the grotesque, hyper-idealized, eroticized statues of the Renaissance/Baroque periods and later, and that is what Orthodox really have the problem with and for notable reasons.
However, it's not as if everything changed overnight or even within a year. I've heard quite a few Orthodox Priests and bishops talk about Medieval theologians, such as Bernard of Clairvaux, being very Orthodox sounding and thinking, but by the time you get to people like Francis Bacon and William of Ockham, both Catholic theologians and noted Franciscan friars, Catholics and Orthodox both seem agree there's a problem.
Just some thoughts I wanted to share. Often it seems like one or the other side wants to ignore the issues as all polemics, and the other wants to make the issues so central and large it discredits anything else that might be good and true tied to that particular tradition. Like with most things, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle.
God Bless you and all your viewers.
I think the cult of “progress” within Rome over the centuries has had the subtle Modus Opporandi to have been making all these strategic little (and contradictory) compromises whenever faced with real resistance, such as the unique late medieval allowance of the Dutch Archdiocese of Ultrich to retain their own independent Synods, to allowing Uniates to retain Orthodox ideas that blatantly contradict several Roman Dogmas, and many more. Genuine Orthodox will hit a wall as disagreements with growing error reach an impasse that we will not cross through or over, but in similar circumstances, Rome sometimes digs instead a tunnel under the wall to get to the other side and claims that that “doesn’t count” as crossing the wall! All that’s really changed since Vatican 2 is now they are more blatant about their intentions and are less hypocritical about being obvious modernists. The Progressives have avoided major Traditionalist backlashes by carefully hoodwinking them, not always successfully, but enough to have radically changed Rome over 1000 years by 1960, which has again changed as much since 1970 to now as they had in the previous 1,000.
Fr. Yves Congar was an evil Modernist, he absolutely *hated* true Catholicism, and was one of the top heretics in charge at the Vatican II Robber Council. Yves Congar and his cronies began a Neo-Modernist movement that despised the Neo-Scholasticism which had served the Church so well. Their movement was called the "Nouvelle Theologie" (French for "New Theology"), it liked to call itself ressourcement - (“return to the sources"), because they claimed they were "returning to patristic thought” but in reality these Modernist theologians, Congar including, deviated from the long-standing theological tradition of the Catholic Church, thus creating a "new theology" all their own, and a disguised resurgence of Modernism- hence, they were censured under the reign of Pius XII (the last “true” pope) and in 1950, he responded with his great encyclical Humani Generis which condemned many of their errors, such as rejecting the traditional dogmatic formulations that emerged throughout Church history as a result of scholastic theology, re-interpreting Catholic dogma in a way that was inconsistent with tradition, falling into the error of dogmatic relativism and criticizing biblical texts in a way that deviated from the principles of biblical hermeneutics outlined by his predecessors (namely: Pope Leo XIII).
Those anti-Vatican II Traditional Catholics who out of desperation, seek a panacea in Russian/Eastern “Orthodoxy”, should be aware that Russian Orthodox “ressourciement” is the seedbed of Vatican II “Nouvelle théologie” and that both are violent, Bolshevik attacks on St. Thomas Aquinas: www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/svsvoices/on_the_mystical_theology_of_the_eastern_church. This is the self-described modernist founder of St Sergius Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris which was the epicenter from which Orthodox theologians like Florovsky, Meyendorff, Lossky, Schmemann spread Russian “Orthodox”neo-Palamism in the West, collaborated with the Modernist infiltrators in the Catholic Church, and participated in the schema of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo. Bulgakov says, “The imprint of our time is stamped vividly on our theological creativity. Since new is the synonym of creativity, we are scolded for our modernism by people...But our modernism is and desires to be a living tradition...”
@John Coolidge Vatican II clearly taught heresy and contradicts previous Catholic, teaching so is clearly not a valid council and not from God, and therefore the authority which gave us Vatican II is not in fact the legitimate Catholic authority at all; the “Popes” which gave us Vatican II are not true Popes, nor are their successors. It has nothing to do with Sobornost “Reception Theory” which is a completely novel theory and very heretical.
@John Coolidge Will do. 🙏🏻
Western Rite is VALID! I love my western rite ORTHODOX brothers.
St. John Maximovich fully blessed them, so I love them. God be with you.
Can you tell me what St. John Maximovitch said or did for the statement “he fully blessed them”.
@@michaelmchugh3987 He consecrated Jean-Nectaire of Saint-Denis as the Hierarch of the Orthodox Church of France and supported their endeavor for an autocephalous church in France that used Western liturgics. The OCF had and still has many problems but Saint John fully supported the Western Rite in concept
@@distracted900 And then those WR churches in France all apostatized and left the Church, just as St John warned them before leaving France. What should we make of that?
@@mynameisjeff6516 I don't think you're aware of the history of the OCF, because if you did you wouldn't say they left the church. They were kicked out of the Church of Romania with no warning
@@mynameisjeff6516 They didn't leave the church. They were under the Church of Romania for over 20 years, until the Patriarch of Romania kicked them out due to political disputes with the EP. They were never accused of wrongdoing
What a phenomenally knowledgeable and open priest!
I’ve now gone to “western rite” twice and absolutely loved it.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Hey, you should get Brother Augustine on. He's not clergy but he is an Orthodox Benedictine Oblate, and his journey from Judaism through Freemasonry and occultism then Protestantism and finally to Orthodoxy. He also has experience attending both Eastern Rite and Western Rite parishes. His book 'The Masons and their Lies' is amazing too.
That sounds like a fascinating conversion story
Very interesting! I'm Eastern orthodox from Greece and I had no idea that there were Eastern orthodox churches that have the western rite. Nice to know that westerners that want to follow the orthodox dogma but find the eastern orthodox rite a bit ''exotic'' no have an alternative choice.
It's a Catholic Church still... almost like a trans church... it's pretending to be Orthodox even though it's catholic. There is, nor is there a need for a replacement for the Eastern Orthodox Church. It is the Original Church of Christ.
@@spartanastasit's not a Catholic church as it is formally part of a canonical Orthodox church.
@@roytofilovski9530 No, it isn't. It's still Catholic. The Catholic Church can not be a part of the Orthodox Church unless it becomes an Orthodox Church... and it's not.
@@spartanastas It's under the jurisdiction of a canonical Orthodox Bishop of a canonical Orthodox Church. It follows the basic Orthodox theology. That makes it Orthodox. The form of the liturgy itself is not relevant so long as it is approved by their Bishop.
Fr. Patrick, may God bless you through the prayers if St. Patrick. Happy St. Patrick day! Many years!!!☘️🕊️
I started attending the tridentine mass but im catholic. It is definitively a blessing and I had quite the spiritual experience when receiving communion. Its completely different than the novus ordo catholic mass. I felt shook the entire sunday and ive had a deep repenting of my sins. I had to go and confess again this week as things come up to me. But im so happy. Orthodox or Catholic thank God the tridentine Mass is being revived and divulged
The interview is simply breathtaking. Austin, thank you so much for it!
Why not just go to the Eastern Orthodox Church? Then you'll have the full benefit of the Original Church of Christ.
Thanks for doing this! Now I want to hear part 2, answering the question of how he came to Western Rite Orthodoxy from the Eastern Rite...
there already is a lovely documentary on the matter th-cam.com/video/ueU-Qjp-sRU/w-d-xo.html
He talks about it briefly in the documentary "The Orthodox West"
When I first came home to the Orthodox Church, I started out at a western rite parish. I now attend an eastern rite parish - and definitely prefer it - but the western rite will always hold a special place in my heart. Very excited to see this! Thank you for bringing awareness to a very misunderstood and relatively unknown yet vital aspect of the Orthodox faith 😄☦️🙏🏻
Awesome! Ive gone the other way and find the western rite the place to be for my family.
Why do you prefer eastern rite?
@@dubblwide the liturgy, the services, Byzantine chant, Byzantine iconography, etc. just prefer it all in its entirety and click with it 🤗
@@autisticheadscarf I ❤️ Byzantine chant. To me it was very hard to listen to at first but it grew on me and I LOVE it now. I love the OCA people I’m glad I had the experience there too. I just can’t express how much I LOVE the Greek Orthodox Church!
@@autisticheadscarf how long ago did you convert? :)
As a Roman Catholic, I fast and I will not be burned. If that's the top of the list then we're basically roommates. I think the look of the Roman Catholic Church is rough only because of the post conciliar chaos. I think both of those "top" issues are going to sort themselves out. Fasting is already on a comeback, and cremation is strongly discouraged (at least traditionally), which is a move in a positive direction. The schism won't be mended in my or my child's life time, but the it will eventually will be "mended." The union comes when the world is so brutalizing that we will have to unite to support one another. RCC has open arms, we don't expect the OC to open it's arms, but we're looking forward to the day that their back isn't turned to us. This video is highly encouraging and I hope the OC finds more Fr Patricks!
It should be clearly understood that Orthodoxy is not about being "eastern", nor "western" either. That is why I rather dislike the common title "Eastern Orthodox Church". The Church is Orthodox, period. (Well, catholic too, and apostolic, etc.)
I happen to be "eastern"; my brother is "western"; we're both converts. The difference lies only in the Divine Liturgy we use primarily. (There are two prominent "eastern" liturgies used at different times in "eastern" parishes, so this is not an anomaly, nor a departure from tradition.) My brother and I are quite different sorts of people. We each have our own preferences and needs generally, and our own different growing to do. We each find the liturgy of our parishes to speak to our own hearts as though we are at home, where the other's liturgy speaks in a different accent. You might think of it as something akin to watching your favorite team play on its home turf one time, or on the visitor's turf another. You focus your attention on the same team, but from different angles.
The key is that all these liturgies are expressions of the *same faith* , the *Orthodox faith* . There are not two "orthodoxies". There is mutual acceptance, the same brotherly (and sisterly) love, the same union in the Body of Christ. I attend an eastern liturgy and eastern services, but I am no less western for that: born in the United States, lived here my whole 70 years, where God put me in time and space. If I moved to Greece I'd be just as much a foreigner as an older Greek who moved here. But neither of us would have any reason to consider the other less Orthodox for that. In fact, I'd call it sinful if one of us did. I know a fair number of Greek-born, and they live among us U.S.-born, but I embrace them as they have embraced me. A bit foreign sometimes; not a bit alien. Eastern and Western, of one communion.
Thank you very much for interviewing Fr. Patrick and about Western Rite Orthodoxy in general. God bless. 🙏🙏
I had forgotten where I saw this a bit ago, had been listening to it while painting my front door that day. Finally came across a new video of yours and realized it must have been you... yup. This has got to be one of the best interviews I have heard in years. I'm fascinated to hear an Orthodox take on Western Christianity, as I've long believed the anti-Augustinian and western in general spin in the Orthodox world was one of its biggest flaws, even as the Catholic Church has actively tried to better acknowledge Eastern traditions and rites. It was a perceived and observed bias that effectively halted my own personal dabbling in the EO worlds some time ago. 1054 may be an official mark in the wall. But the issues started long before and really continue to this day. Very, very happy to see at least one leader in the Orthodox Church acknowledge the flaws in the aspects of it that aren't the least bit based on true theological differences. Sadly, I don't see much to suggests these views are widespread. It seems clear to me that many in the EO world don't have a counterpart ideology to Vatican II's "breathe with two lungs" metaphor.
Thanks for the kind words!
I'll not say too much about this but needless to say I can only thank Fr Patrick for speaking with such humility and love here! A few thoughts from those who dislike the Western Rite (and are Orthodox)
Ultimately, if one denies the Western Rite - you deny the Latin patronage of the Orthodox Church, who produced Saints of both East and West and thus, western liturgies, theology and patristics are absolutely equal to their eastern counterpart. To be Orthodox is to accept this, the liturgy changes the cultus of how people are raised spiritually, what Fr Georges Florovsky (quite probably the greatest Orthodox theologian of the 20th century) envisioned is a true patristic synthesis - where both the Eastern and Latin traditions of the Church can be brought together, this is and should be the ultimate goal of the Western Rite, to 'un-easternify' itself and to bring balance to the Traditions of the Church. This means that St Augustine can and should be read as much as St Gregory of Nyssa, St Ambrose as much as St John Chysostom, St Hilary of Poitiers as St Basil the Great.
This anti-western attitude is something that Fr Patrick is quite right in pointing out how modern of a novelty it is. When the Saints of the medieval period and early modern (whether St Nicholas Cabasilas, St Mark of Ephesus, St Gennadius Scholarius, St Peter Mogila, St Dimitri of Rostov, just to name a few, met and saw the works of the Latin Fathers, they praised them! They said they were exceptional nourishment for the soul, these same people also did much work in translating post-schism Western works such as Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas and again, they praised these people to high heavens. Did they disagree with some of what they said? Certainly! But they still saw the good that their works did have.
Ultimately criticisms of the Western Rite amount to denying the Catholicity of the Orthodox Catholic Church, not because a rite is somehow 'needed' to make the Church 'more Catholic' but rather because it leads people to deny the importance of the Latin Tradition and at times outright denies the graces that were poured out in the west through the spiritual life of the associated Western Rites.
@John Coolidge Did I ever criticise the Eastern Rite? I said nothing of the sort. It's not about whether people feel comfortable with the Churches Rites - It's about the recognition that the Orthodox Catholic Church has various patronages, all of which are equal to each other. The reason why there's such a reluctance for people to convert to Orthodoxy is simply because of this obsession with not hatred of the West, its the neglect of the Western Patronage that pushes people away, especially since Saints, Councils, theologians have all endorsed the Western Rite for this purpose.
@John Coolidge also not I never said that you can't criticise the Western Rite. Are there issues that can creep into something? Yes. Its like with anything as Fr Patrick said, Aquinas and Anselm mightve held errors (Aquinas more so) but that doesn't mean throwing the baby out with the bath water. Saints Mark of Ephesus, Gennadius Scholarius, Gregory Palamas, Dimitri of Rostov, Peter Mogila and many others recognised this, that criticism of something doesn't mean something is inherently bad.
@John Coolidge Notice I said 'Ultimately' and note what I said after. Criticism of Rites isn't what I said was the issue. The reason why it's 'Ultimately' denying the Catholicity is that the arguments against the WR typically boil down to either 1. Eastern Rite Supremacy 2. A belief in the 'Latin Captivity' and general anti-westernism.
The Church is Catholic - with multiple patristic and theological traditions that exist and they are equal. Father Georges Florovsky, one of the greatest Orthodox theologians wanted to see all these traditions balance each other. I've yet to see any actual engagement with the points I've made here.
If theres something of appreciate is the you use bookmarks so we can skip the ads. Real chad move.
I try
Thanks so much for doing this interview! I struggled with this concept as I am Jamaican and Dutch culturally. So neither of my ethnic roots are very 'eastern'. I also grew up evangelical so every part of my spiritual background felt a little attacked while learning about Orthodoxy. Eventually, through reading St. Herman of Alaska's story my heart was softened towards the Orthodox church (Holy Spirit orchestrated all of that).
Listening to this interview has enlightened my journey even more! Especially as I come closer to my baptismal date :)
God bless you! ☦
You are doing an amazing job of finding extremely interesting and insightful people to talk to. Thank you so much!
My pleasure!
Why does someone need a western rite ? To me as a western person (former baptist), the Roman Catholic “western” style of worship is way stranger to me than Russian or Byzantine. If Byzantine chant sounds too middle eastern for you, go to a Russian or OCA church the music doesn’t sound that much different than Medieval western church music
Because the West was Orthodox for 1000+ years and deserves to be recognized
I think it’s a good thing that western liturgies are in the canonical Orthodox Church again. They have their own unique appeal.
Tell me you know nothing about the Western rite without telling me you know nothing about the Western Rite. Hopefully this video will open you up a bit.
St John of Shanghai and San Francisco did so much for the western rite. He’s the one that said don’t let anyone tell you that you need to be eastern in order to be Orthodox, that the west was Orthodox for 1000 years.
As a former western rite parishioner, I definitely agree that a westerner would feel very comfortable at an OCA parish.
Austin, thank you for doing this interview. I do not agree with many statements made in this interview but I am happy to hear them nonetheless. The Western Rite Orthodoxy in theory makes much sense and I believe it was started with the best of intentions BUT in practice it has led to small congregations that convert to Orthodoxy without having to actually accept Orthodoxy. If you can walk from one parish and go into another and nothing changes except the name you commemorate, is that a true inner conversion? I would find it hard to say so. Certainly that is a broad stroke on my part but it is my anecdotal experience as a priest but the fact that many of the Western Rite believers have little or nothing to do with the greater Orthodoxy is proof of this. Further, the Orthodox Church has developed hymnography, menology, spirituality, and an ethos that goes well beyond the liturgy of St. Gregory the Great. Accepting that inheritance has little to do with becoming Russian Or Greek... it is just Orthodox.
I’d have to say this is not the experience I’ve had becoming Orthodox in a Western Rite parish. I suppose it happens somewhere. We go to Eastern Rite parishes when on vacation. We have many many Eastern Orthodox books in our parish. We really look to all this for the fullness of the faith.
Father bless, I understand where you are coming from but it's hard to agree when my own personal experience has been opposite of what you described. What I have seen however, is Eastern Rite brothers and sisters in Christ judge those in the Western Rite for having a deficient Orthodoxy just because they have looked at it from the surface and completely diminish the fruits of the Western patrimony in our own lives. It seems like it would be hard to arrive at a certain level of communion and comradery when a lot of the times those on the Western Rite are, from the ourset, treated as second class citizens just because of their liturgical expression of Orthodoxy. I think there is always a conflation between the idea that to be Orthodox, you must have the eastern ethos and therefore anything that deviates from that cannot be Orthodox, but that is clearly not true or else we would have to concede saints such as St. Ambrose, St. Patrick, St. Jerome and Pope St. Leo and Gregory, St. Augustine as less than Orthodox, and I am not ready to do that. I believe that to doubt the genuine Orthodoxy of those in the Western Rite and assume they are disguised Roman Catholics and assume there was never a conversion to begin with every time the topic is brought up does a diservice to the church as a whole, and that is exactly why I don't go around saying that Cradle Greek parishes are not genuinely Orthodox just because I have personally experienced that they tend to have a higher degree of luke-warm Christians.
@@Leo-uq6jp couldn’t have said it better
Fr. Michael, it's my pleasure! I must say, the second sentence of this comment is exemplary of the kind of interaction I hope to see with the content on this channel.
practices after the great schism are very problematic.
Anyone watching this exactly a year later?
Absolutely wonderful interview. Thank you Fr. Patrick.
Its so wild hearing BEALETON Virginia on youtube. I went to high school a mile from this church
Me too
@@tonyrandall8703 what year? I graduated 2016
@@maxonmendel5757 oh boy. 13 years before you. We never crossed paths but still cool
One example of anti-Westernism in Orthodoxy... When I was preparing for chrismation, I initially chose a cross that was a Celtic crucifix. Some Orthodox online told me the cross wasn't appropriate because the feet of Christ were depicted one over the other, pierced by a single nail, which is common in western crucifixes. (Some Orthodox even consider such a depiction of Christ's feet heretical. The "triclavian" heresy.) Feeling a bit dejected, I chose another cross. During Holy Week some time later, when the crucifix behind the altar was brought out, processed around the congregation, and placed up front for our veneration, I noticed the feet were depicted as in that Celtic crucifix-rather than the more common Byzantine style of feet side-by-side, punctured by separate nails.
Trust me dude, I'm sick of the anti Western bias in Orthodoxy.
Rule one for Orthodoxy (or any other religion): everyone should avoid online religious "advisors" as the highest priority.
Ask your priest. Forget about what people online think.
I would love to hear you talk to a priest or Bishop from the Anglican Rite of the Catholic Church--Officially referred to as the Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter. I believe that there are 23 parishes in America. I was raised in the Protestant Episcopal church but have been a Roman Catholic since 1978---and I am seriously considering retiring to an area that has an Ordinariate parish. The words of the liturgy are largely based in the English of the mid 16th century--moving and beautiful!
That would be great fun for me
I second this Ordinariate is very beautiful, reverent and traditional while being in English. Austin if you can attend mass or morning and evening prayer.
@@GospelSimplicity
And I would recommend you try to get in contact with Archpriest Emeritus Lester Bundy of Saint Columba Orthodox, Lafayette Colorado. He represents the Orthodox equivalent of the Ordinate that Jean Dotan is talking about, Anglican Rite Orthodoxy, a subset of Western Orthodoxy a bit different from Father Cardine’s direct and plain translation of Saint Gregory The Great’s Divine Liturgy.
Instead, Saint Tikhon of Moscow rehabilitated Cranmer’s Anglican mass (itself a simplified version of the venerable Divine Liturgy of Saint Osmond, the “Salisbury/Sarum Rite”), for use by former Anglican priests converted to Orthodoxy who were unable to learn Osmond’s Mass in its original form, for whatever reason. This rehabilitation was much easier to learn. Father Bundy is an expert on the Anglican Rite and a fantastic Iconographer in the Anglo-Saxon/Celtic style of Britannia.
Here’s most of a lecture series he did two years ago (I missed part 2)
th-cam.com/video/OMx98TeTKsU/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/NapMnT2Rt5k/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/mqeBqpdiLRk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/GA-R8t0ehHo/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for the video. I hope that you can bring in Fr. Thomas Loya, a Byzantine Catholic priest who talks about the “genus” of the West and the East. It is within the genus of the East, to draw people in her liturgy. While it is in the genus of the West to be more sharp when the Church needs to clarify things, etc.
I appreciate the critique of his own people. Reminds me of Seraphim Rose and his book on Augustine.
Although I am fascinated by WR and have attended a nearby one a few times and admire their priest, it would be nice to hear Fr. Patrick in a discussion with someone who perhaps is “guilty” of some of these eastern polemics he talks about. I’ve listened to several of his interviews and he never gets any push back against some of his claims and I’d like to see what Fr. Trenham or Fr. Strickland might have to say about some of his remarks in a venue where there could be direct back and forth.
@John Coolidge Adoration does happen at St. Patrick's. I think it's fine.
@John Coolidge There's an article written by Fr. Patrick himself on the Orthodox West website (link in the description of the video) called "Benediction-Adoration: A Beautiful vision" where he defends Adoration. I would post the direct link but TH-cam keeps deleting my comment even if I try to work around it.
I would also like to see this, but perhaps between fr. Patrick and an lcms or Episcopalian priest about why Orthodoxy is necessary
@John Coolidge
To be fair, they don’t usually Consecrate the Eucharist specifically for this, the way modern Romans do, but encourage veneration of surplus. We have a lot of people who have to make long commutes to church and sometimes can’t make it, (SO many are converted from online study and aren’t necessarily close to a parish when they do) so our priests take a lot of pre sanctified Eucharist to people all over throughout the week who couldn’t make it to mass that Sunday. Is the Surplus kept for such circuit preaching and shut-ins not worthy of veneration in the meantime? It is how Rome started Eucharistic veneration to begin with, but they took it a step too far in standardizing it whether or not there was a surplus waiting (or even needed) for travel, instead of letting it happen mostly organically.
Also, using a sample of a Meal to advertise a meal is an age old and effective way to promote It.
@@maxonmendel5757
Father Bundy could be both in that debate:
th-cam.com/video/OMx98TeTKsU/w-d-xo.html
This helps me so much with the question of my idenity. I am a Scottish American, I'm far from Eastern or Russian. Wish I could, go American Orthodox. I'm am blessed with the 3 choices near me. Thank you!
Read “Ex Oriente Lux” a brilliant biography, by Abba Seraphim, of Dr. Joseph J. Overbeck and his tragic rivalry with Father Stephen Hatherly, and the beginning and disagreements about the Western Orthodox revival.
Just sang the service for St. Patrick yesterday at my Orthodox parish. But he’s right; “western” is a dirty word. Thus conversation has to be had theologically, though, and in dialogue. There’s reasons for this beyond chauvinism or ignorance. The Dr. Jeannie Constantinou’s are going to have to be convinced about Western vs. Eastern “thinking.”
He's so right about losing 1,000 converts. I love Orthodoxy but my family got turned against it when some of the anti-Protestant things were mentioned. If someone is seeking, it's best to not insult how they came to Christ. Only a miracle will get them into Orthodoxy at this point. I feel "home" and love the Liturgy but the Slavic traditions are too much for them. On another topic, Protestants are so seeker-sensitive that they try not to offend, and this is very different within Orthodoxy. Just his "burn their dead" comment, while true, could drive away many. What about all the Christians who have been cremated not knowing it was not a Christian tradition, but a pagan one? Every truth needs to be expressed with the knowledge that listeners may have done that exact thing. My dad was cremated, but Jesus actually came to him when he was dying and my dad believed in Christ, and came back and told me about his vision. He died about a month later. I don't think cremation is right, it definitely wasn't good for me as a child for my dad to have made that choice, but I don't think it kept my dad out of heaven. I'm not offended, btw, but my mother might have been. I would love to visit his church if we're ever in the area. I can tell his heart is to bring people the full truth. We've lost so much in the West.
It’s always interesting to hear what someone emphasizes, because that reveals their priorities.
@John Coolidge Greek tradition has one icon to venerate in the vestibule, at least the one I visited. At our Serbian church, you venerate the central icon, Christ and the Theotokos icons on the iconostasis, then again go up to kiss the central icon at the end of the service, and the cross, and the priest's hand. I know Greeks kiss the cross, too, but there is a lot more of it for a Protestant to adapt to in the Slavic style. My family was really overwhelmed with all the extra bows and kissing things. In our town, the Greek church didn't have as many converts and there were people saying unkind things about their own priest (who is a convert). They did this in the vestibule, complaining he mispronounced something. They also were hard on him on Facebook about an article he sent out about Halloween from a former Satan worshippers perspective. I could just tell many were worldly and didn't want to try, just keep their Greek traditions. It was sad. The Serbian church was full of converts who really wanted to be there, and love our priest. The priest is wonderful at the other congregation, but the parishioners were not very kind. I will shop around if I have two choices. There should only be one church in America-all English, technically, if we were to be like all other Orthodox countries. If the Western Rite was offered, it would be as legitimate as Eastern Rite. St. John Maximovich vouched for it and wanted to convert people using it, right? With Serbian being my choice because I love the people and the singing, and my family thouroughly turned off by various things, I may have to be baptized and chrismated alone. I'm not sure why Orthodox people don't want people to come. Why make it as off putting as possible, and insult Protestants to their faces? It's really strange, but we all know the enemy is working overtime.
@John Coolidge
It varies. My brother in law is DEFINITELY more comfortable in the Western Rite, particularly regarding how the Eucharist is distributed. We converted from Trad Catholicism, however, so we’re not bringing all the potential Protestant baggage with us. This was how Orthodox Rome did it from at least the Dialogist’s time as Pope, and it’s in our bones to do it this way for most of us. Your argument’s applicability really depends on what someone wants to be comfortable ABOUT. Believe me, they couldn’t comprehend the spoon at a Uniate liturgy, either, when we were still struggling to believe in the papal dogmas. We considered pulling a “Matt Fradd” but, the spoon was always too strange for them. I don’t mind, but that’s just how some are built. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a lack of faith, per se. They have no doubt in the Eucharist, or at least I have no reason to doubt them. They are just culturally shy of the spoon, is all.
@@OrthodoxInquirer sigh.
Many are so anti-ecumenical that they confuse apologetic diplomacy as synonymous with ecumenism.
@@eldermillennial8330 How do they distribute the Eucharist?
Now, this is a guy who I think has good thoughts. I had an Eastern Orthodox friend tell me when I became Lutheran how i could be Lutheran because a tradition that came out of a dead tradition is a dead tradition. It kind of shut down the dialogue real quick
@OrthodoxyChloroQuine You didn't watch the video, did you?
Ron, I am Eastern Orthodox but I'm a bit shocked by the tone and language used to put down Lutheranism. Having been raised and baptized in the Southern Baptist Christian community, entering into communion with Roman Catholicism while I was in college and, finally finding my home in Eastern Orthodoxy I am a great proponent of emphasizing our commonalities, which are numerous in our differences but if we can recite the Nicene- Constantinopolitan Creed together and say Amen at the end we are definitely Christian brothers and sisters Asnd as brothers and sisters
As Christian brothers and sisters we engage with one another where we agree and be charitable with honored with one another
Where we disagree. The final post by OrthodoxyChloroQuine was more to my taste and in the spirit of Christian charity. You did not say which scented a Lutheran to which you belong but I have been impressed by a couple of Lutheran ministers on TH-cam. One is from the Lutheran Church of Missouri synod and the other is from the American Association of Lutheran Churches. I know there are significant differences between Lutheranism and Orthodoxy when you get into the weeds and those are significant differences. However I had very little to find issue with from Christian basics with these two Representatives of Lutheranism.
I apologize for the abominable syntax and spelling in the above posts. Please do not judge the Eastern Orthodox by inability to properly proofread the AI before I press the send button. If my senior year English teacher Miss Crater
I am glad to see/hear your pitch for mental health as there is a need for authentically Christian mental health providers. On Faithful Counseling:
I’m watching this in 12/2023 and the link goes to Better Help. Please reconsider the endorsement as it is a different organization. I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian. I am a mental health counselor and trained chaplain in North Carolina. I can provide consulting and coaching across the US.
Thanks for letting me know about this. I will reach out to them and see what's going on
Western Rite = Latin Mass = Roman Rite = Mass of the West = Mass of Pope St. Gregory the Great = Catholic Mass able to be said by Orthodox because the theology of the Liturgy is the same when you remove accreted hostility and diatribical convinctions.
And remove “Filioque”, the first false accretion. Saint Tikhon also rehabilitated Cranmer’s Anglican mass, a far bigger challenge, but it was easier than having former Anglican priests try to Learn St Osmond’s Divine Liturgy in its pristine form. Some do, but it is the most massive form of High Mass after the Ambrosian.
Does this Western Rite Orthodox Church have the Hail Mary, Stations of the Cross add the Rosary? Does the priest drink the wine only or does he allow everyone else to drink it also? Does he use leaven or unleavened bread? Or those priests allowed to be married?
@@truckdriver8416 Western Orthodox is literally just 'hey, no pope pls.' But you don't get to therefore import the East into perennial Western customs, rites, liturgies, etc therefore. It doesn't follow. St. Paul wished all could be celibate. The West made this a requirement if you wish to be a presbyter/elder/bishop. Like it or not. If the East differs, good. But don't pretend the West just didn't exist and didn't have its own customs or rules.
Did Christ hold the Passover with leavened or unleavened bread? It was literally the fest of unleavened bread on which He instituted the Eucharist.
So I wouldn't exactly make that a make or break. Not that I wouldn't be against the Apsostles having instituted leavened bread for the Eucharist.. just that it's not exactly a strong argument, is it.
@@AveChristusRex well you really didn't answer my questions about Mary in the Rosary. The Russian Church wants did a sermon on the Hail Mary that I'll listen to that was really nice.
The no marriage thing for the clergy was actually to keep all property and money in the coffers of the church instead of going to the children's inheritance. That's a matter of coveting quite frankly and we all see the sins of homosexuality that came out of that don't we.
As for the Upper Room there were two ceremonies that took place not one. The first ceremony was a traditional Passover meal with unleavened bread. The second ceremony was the New Covenant with leavened bread.
So does the Western right do the Hail Mary the Rosary and the Stations of the Cross? I figured since you claim to have gone there you would know this much appreciated a response
@@truckdriver8416 "The no marriage thing for the clergy was actually to keep all property and money in the coffers of the church instead of going to the children's inheritance. That's a matter of coveting quite frankly and we all see the sins of homosexuality that came out of that don't we."
That. Or, celibacy and virginity was praised by the Fathers in general, but by St. Paul specifically, who wished "all men were as I am, [celibate]." And who taught that those who are not married can better dedicate themselves to the service of God.
Think to yourself, who first comes to mind among those who ought to devote their life to the service of God? Hmmm. Who could that be?
"As for the Upper Room there were two ceremonies that took place not one. The first ceremony was a traditional Passover meal with unleavened bread. The second ceremony was the New Covenant with leavened bread."
This is nowhere in either Scripture or Tradition.
"So does the Western right do the Hail Mary"
The Hail Mary is DIRECTLY from Scripture, and the "Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners, now, and at the hour of our death" is, of course, obviously, Orthodox.
Both East and West, we object to what is 'foreign' or 'not customaryin our tradition' without a good reason. You'll find a lot of things you're comfortable with come from the Fathers and we in the West are uncomfortable with. But the same applies to us: we're uncomfortable with some of the things in the Fathers that are familiar to you.
If you can sing the Agni Parthene, we can sing the Memorare.
Orthodox when Orthodox attend Eastern Liturgies in the West: 🦗🦗🦗
Orthodox when Orthodox attend Western Liturgy in the West: 👀👀👀
Yes!! So excited for this!
Loved this, would love to see him on again.
I wish I could like this a few more times.
I think it's funny that the two ecclesial entities that claim to be the Catholic Church both possess each other's rites.
Western rite orthodoxy doesn’t do Novus Ordo, also i think they do the liturgy of pope saitn gregory the great
@@mariorizkallah5383 Their "Liturgy of Pope St Gregory the Great" is just the TLM according to rubrics from like the 1950s. They celebrate the feastday of Christ the King as instituted by like Pius XI or XII or something before the feast day was moved to what it is on the 1962 calendar.
"Each other's rites"
Both rites belong to Orthodoxy.
@@mariorizkallah5383 "Western rite orthodoxy doesn’t do Novus Ordo"
Niether do Catholics ;)
@@KevinTheMetalhead The Pope-Saints disagree.
Orthodox from Finland, just saying hello 😊
Hello!
If you are in Northern California check out All Saints Orthodox Mission. It’s a ROCOR Western Rite mission.
Awesome interview. I love Father Patrick.
As a Former RC who lived through the “reforms” of Vat2, I cringe around the Roman rite of Liturgy. Sad
This seems super interesting at first I thought it was a typo very interesting brother
That's how I felt when I first heard about it!
53:49 I would to want a second video so good as this about these topics!!!
I'm hoping to visit his church sometime, so maybe we could dive into it then
I was right! Love from Saint Columba Orthodox!
This priest is a true gem. The meme, mostly online, Orthodox apologetic that is antagonistic to anything western really attracts a particular type of convert. And it does so at the expense of many open minded individuals that are interested in the truth.
And he's also right that this anti-western, meme theology is rooted in the slavophile, Parisian movement, with its emphasis on eastern "distinctives."
I think it's also rooted in the fact that the main export of the West for the past 30 years has been satanic nonsense. I mean yeah, there's western rite orthodoxy, but almost only in America and really not in meaningful numbers, so it doesn't really change the picture, other than that maybe it provides a vision of something that could be revived.
It began when Doctor Joseph J Overbeck and Father Stephen Hatherly came to cross purposes in the London newspapers during the latter part of the Tractarian debates, wasting time in pitting Orthodox against Orthodox instead of uniting to focus against both Romanism and Protestantism.
I’ve met him; I can confirm he is most certainly a gem…
how long until the Church offers a rehabilitation of the Oriental Rites (Coptic, Ge’ez, West Syriac, East Syriac, etc.)?
I read abt a bunch of Assyrians (maybe early 20th century?)... Who were East Syriac rite Christians (Church of the East).... Who when converted to Eastern Orthodoxy, had to fully become Byzantine Rite to be "Orthodox ". Sadly. And they became Eastern Orthodox.
@@Melvin_Thoma :/. I know some aspects of the Nestorian services wouldn’t fly (“The Hallowing of Nestorius” for example), but the overall rite predates the Nestorian schism I think
Very difficult. I know a bit of the Coptic liturgy, and they have very heavy christological content at times that would need to be scrapped or changed.
Hey Austin, im kinda new to your channel, it would be super interesting if you keep making live debates such as the last, about eucharist througj baptist and catholic lens. Bring more people from different denominations to debate on one common christian doctrine, it was awesome.
9/11 today is my 29th anniversary as a convert… but the Protestant Church game me everything I needed to get here for 46 years! Glory to God!
In the beginning… some converts act like X-smokers or people who just lost 40 lbs and tell you where YOUR diet is wrong and why you are FAT!
Eeewwwww!
Humans especially now have a bad habit of bragging.
Just wait a year after 6 months of prayer and fasting kicks that ego to the ground!
It takes time but that’s the point of putting Christ in the center of everything instead of ourselves.
I admire the intentions of the Western Rite movement, and I respect Fr. Patrick. Though I enjoy and support the basic ideals of this movement, I want to kindly point out its flaws, and later the solutions to those errors.
-The Western rite use of statues is a Roman Catholic tradition, with no real pre-great schism origins. The style starts to be seen in its basic forms in the 11th century, a very sad century, since it marked the Great Schism.
-Pre-great schism Catholicism overwhelmingly used its unique style of mosaics, mozarabic and italo-byzantine iconography, and regional variants of two-dimensional Christian artwork.
Solution: Revive these old forms of two-dimensional iconography, particularly italo-byzantine, Mozarabic, and mosaics.
Causes of this error: most western-rite orthodox are roman Catholic converts, and so mistake the roman catholic art for pre-great Schism Catholic art.
I read somewhere that some byzantine churches (and present day Greek ones) also had statues.
Honestly, why does Orthodoxy have to adhere solely to the byzantine aesthetic? Ethiopian churches have their own iconography that differs from the byzantine style.
@@MrSofuskroghlarsen We do have statues, I never made any claim against that. The intention and rule of the western rite is to look like a pre-great schism parish. Therefore, they need far more icons than statues. Ethiopian iconography is acceptable and accurate.
@@MrSofuskroghlarsen We do not use only byzantine style iconography. I don't know why you got that impression. Russian iconography is different, and so is arabic/Antiochian iconography.
@@MrSofuskroghlarsenBaroque iconography is permissible in Orthodoxy so long as it does not stray from church teaching. There are lots of Ortho churches in Serbia for example with Baroque icons.
Pretty sure that statues existed in the West prior to the schism.
This was a very interesting interview . Great guest
Thank you for your video! It helped me a lot!
The Longer Catechism of the Orthodox, Catholic, Eastern Church AKA the Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow literally, explicitly teaches that there is “a fund [i.e. treasury] of infinite merit”.
By the way, did you know that the distribution of indulgences is an Eastern Orthodox practice, being legalized at the Great Council of Constantinople of 1727, which taught:
“The power of the abandonment of sins, which, if filed in writing, which the Eastern Church of Christ calls ‘permissive letters’, and the Latin people "indulgences" is given by Christ in the holy Church. These ‘permissive letters’ are issued throughout the catholic Church by the four holiest patriarchs: Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem." It is not forbidden nor condemned, the only thing forbidden about them is selling for profit, besides that is completely normal, legal and traditional.
Moreover, they were taught by Dositheos of Jerusalem who wrote "It is an established custom and ancient tradition, known to all, that the Most Holy Patriarchs give the absolution certificate to the faithful people they have granted them from the beginning and still do."
Your St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite who, being the author of "The Rudder" knew Orthodox practices as well as probably almost anyone at the time he lived, wrote a letter to Paisius, Bishop of Stagonas, asking him to obtain an absolution certificate (which the 1727 Council identifies as an indulgence) for a monk in his monastery. Decree 18 of the Confession of Dositheos speaks of something very similar to Purgatory, the people who repented from Mortal sins, but have not had any fruit of repentence, can be delivered from punishment by things that include "the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed". How would you distinguish between what is mentioned in the Confession to what was taught by the Catholic Church at 2nd Lyons, Florence and Trent?
@John Coolidge
I. The Constantinople Council of 1727 says the 4 Eastern Patriarchs, not just the Patriarch of Jerusalem, have approved and authorized Indulgences, which they call Certificates of Absolution, “The power of the forgiveness of sins, which is termed by the Eastern Church of Christ Absolution Certificates when given in writing, but by the Latins Indulgences, is given to the Holy Church by Christ. These Absolution Certificates are issued in the whole Catholic Church by the four most holy Patriarchs: Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem." This was cited in the OP.
Two things are clear from the Eastern Orthodox Synod…
(a) the Synod considers absolution certificates to be the same as what Latin Catholics call Indulgences, as shown by the words, "The power of the forgiveness of sins, which is termed by the Eastern Church of Christ Absolution Certificates when given in writing, but by the Latins Indulgences, is given to the Holy Church by Christ."
(b) These absolution certificates are considered universal within the Eastern Orthodox Church: “These Absolution Certificates are issued in the whole Catholic Church by the four most holy Patriarchs: Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem" note the words "the whole Catholic Church" i.e. whole Orthodox Eastern Church.
II. Patriarch Dositheus confessed this doctrine in an Eastern Orthodox Council in the 17th Century, "And the souls of those involved in mortal sins, who have not departed in despair but while still living in the body, though without bringing forth any fruits of repentance, have repented - by pouring forth tears, by kneeling while watching in prayers, by afflicting themselves, by relieving the poor, and finally by showing forth by their works their love towards God and their neighbor, and which the Catholic Church has from the beginning rightly called satisfaction - [their souls] depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from there, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed; especially the unbloody Sacrifice benefiting the most; which each offers particularly for his relatives that have fallen asleep, and which the Catholic and Apostolic Church offers daily for all alike. Of course, it is understood that we do not know the time of their release. We know and believe that there is deliverance for such from their direful condition, and that before the common resurrection and judgment, but when we know not." From: www.crivoice.org/creeddositheus.html
III. If there is a distinction in Hades between those (1) who can be saved, and those (2) who cannot be saved, well what else is (1) but Hell proper, and what else is (2) but a kind of purgatorial purification state? For if they can be released, it is obvious they are capable of being sanctified, and we call such sanctification Purgatorial. When this was discussed between Latin and Greek Theologians at the Council of Florence, the Catholic Church assured the Orthodox that nothing else had been dogmatically defined but that (1) a Purgatorial state exists and that (2) the souls detained there can be assisted by the suffrage gained by the Faithful.
In most of the early Church, there were two views, based on St. Paul's teaching that some would be saved through fire in 1 Cor 3. Either (1) all would be saved through fire, and then we have universalism, as apparently in St. Gregory of Nyssa, or (2) only some, for lesser sins, would be saved through fire, as appears in another St. Gregory, the great Pope of Rome. So if Purgatory is not true, Universalism would be.
@John Coolidge The modern Eastern Orthodox deny purgatory, but are rather inconsistent in their way of putting forth its belief. Because in church history, you’ll see different articulations of purgatory. Sometimes different names to describe it even, in the east and the west. Here’s how Eastern Orthodox metropolitan, Kallistos Ware, describes the current state of orthodoxy on the question of purgatory. He writes: “Orthodox are convinced that Christians here on earth have a duty to pray for the departed. And, they are confident that the dead are helped by such prayers. But, precisely in what way do our prayers help the dead? What exactly is the condition of souls in the period between death and the resurrection of the body at the last day. Here, Orthodox teaching is not in entirely clear and has varied somewhat at different times. In the 17th century, a number of Orthodox writers, most notably Peter of Mogila and Dositheos in his confession upheld the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory, or something very close to it.”
This is evident in the 1672 Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem. And, it said the following about purgatory, very close to the Catholic view. “The souls of the departed are either at rest or in torment, according to their conduct in life. But, their condition will not be perfect till the resurrection of the body. The souls of those who die in a state of penitence without having brought forth fruits of repentance or satisfactions, depart into Hades. And, there, they must suffer the punishment for their sins. But, they may be delivered by the prayers of the priests and the alms, or giving to the poor, of their kindred. Especially, by the unbloody sacrifice of the mass, which individuals offer for their departed relatives, and which the Catholic and apostolic church daily offers for all alike. The liberation from this intervening state of purification will take place before the resurrection and the general judgment. But, the time is unknown.”
In another word, Kallistos Ware says this. “It is true that Orthodox theologians usually express reservations about the doctrine of purgatory as developed in medieval and post medieval Roman Catholic teaching. But, at the same time, most of them allow for some sort of purging or purification after death. Catholic and Orthodox views on the middle state after death are less sharply opposed than appears at first.”
P.S. Are you a Protestant convert?
@John Coolidge So does Fr. Josiah Trentham have more authority than an council of Eastern Orthodox patriarchs of 4 of the most ancient sees? Who gave him the authority to speak on behalf of all of Orthodoxy?
@John Coolidge They changed their doctrine?
@@dexteradomini7103 amen brother ! I was EO and saw how modern orthodoxy is not really how orthodoxy was back then and after finding out Council of Florence I could not deny Rome
Austin, I was checking out your merch, nice selection. I have heard the saying, a Theologian is one who prays; one who prays is a Theologian. I wondered if you would consider sharing with your audience about your own practice of prayer. Alternatively, maybe an interview/episode on prayer, perhaps from different Christian practices, such as from Orthodox perspective, Catholic, Protestant, etc. Just a thought triggered by the Theologian merch. Keep up the good work spreading rhe good news. 👍
As someone interested in Orthodoxy (tentatively) but depressed to find I truly live at a ridiculous distance from any Orthodox Parish, also being a proud Anglo-American who might actually be sympathetic to the Orthodox Way (a shame nobody could've reached out during the Reformation in Britain methinks) who just isn't about to LARP being Oriental (not going to trade one for another) this interests me greatly! Would love to know more.
The impression I've gotten is that the jury is still out on whether or not Orthodoxy at large embraces the legitimacy of a Western form -- due to the fact that "Western" implies not only a Latin-Rite based Liturgy but also a tacit acceptance of the development of Western Theology/Soteriology (also they often seem to be ex-Anglicans, not always, but there is a trend). But as far as I'm concerned it's as much a positive reality as Uniate Catholicism; expanding our understanding of how particular expressions of each faith tradition can coincide is a godly endeavor.
The jury has already settled it. It is completely valid and accepted by the Church. The only opposition you find comes from lay internet members "some refer to them as OrthodoxBros" that are ignorant on the subject matter. Also, the faith/theology isn't different compared to the eastern rites. You may find a western rite orthodox pray the rosary but they believe exactly the same as anyone in the eastern Churches.
@a Okay I'm human? Christ citation needed
@John Coolidge It's been slightly modified, but the nuts and bolts are the same. If you are interested or just want to compare, I recommend the Saint Ambrose Prayer book. It is a much better resource than myself. It has everything in it "rosary beads aside"
@John Coolidge Well, without debating when the Rosary originated, the Latins were using beads for the BVM. Those were essentially rosaries without being explicit rosaries. The main thing to examine though is the spirit of the practice. There are various things that occurred in the west post schism that the east does fully/would fully embrace as Orthodox. Not all things from the Roman Catholic Church is bad. The Church, including the eastern Churches, view the WRO Rosary as Orthodox.
@John Coolidge The depictions are not used in our practice. That is one of the modifications
I read this from The website of my friend's church where they practice the Western Rite, and thought it was good to share...
"We believe papal heresy, theological and liturgical innovation, has removed the Latin Church from the center of uninterrupted Apostolic Deposit, So we do not consider ourselves in communion with the Roman Catholicism or seek recognition from the Roman Catholic Church. While Western in our liturgical expression, culture and language, We are fully orthodox in our theology, rejecting the Filioque, Papal Supremacy, Universal Jurisdiction, Infallibility, The Roman definition of the Immaculate Conception, And all the Protestant heresies that resulted from the West's departure from the Ancient, Apostolic, Catholic Faith"
Imagine identifying yourself by what you are not.
@@godfreym3550 It was the last paragraph of multiple paragraphs. I shared it for context sake for people like myself who left the Catholic Church
@@godfreym3550They have no choice, since many people falsely label them as Catholics or psuedo-Catholics
I have a question, and this is just based off my limited experience. I go to church on Easter, and people prostrate before an icon of Jesus in the tomb. My friend prostrates before Baba's icon before leaving the temple. How is the veneration of iconography different between what I've seen at church, and what I've seen at temple?
The process is the same. The difference is the One being venerated. Jesus is God. The others in pagan religions are idols and false teachers. It is always about who is being venerated.
The Liturgy of St. James Brother of the Lord is the Great Bridge and the overlapping of the spheres East & West.
From OCA website:
Question
How does the Orthodox Church view cremation?
Answer
The Church does not condemn cremation outright, provided that there is a valid reason for it.
In Japan, for example, the state requires cremation, and this extends to Orthodox Christians. There have also been exceptions made in cases of epidemics or fear of disease, for various reasons. There can also be reasonable cause for permitting cremation, but in general the image of the body being buried as it awaits the resurrection is more in keeping with the image given to us by Christ, Who likens burial with the planting of seed which later blossoms into a living plant.
Yep. the Roman Catholics actually take a bit stronger stance than this even. I do not think that part of the video was fair.
I feel like I vacillate between Western Rite Orthodoxy & Byzantine Rite Catholicism in my heart, and then there's my occasional affinity to the Continuing Anglican Movement, the SSPX & the Personal Ordinariate...man, it's hard to find a theological home, but oh so easy to know which versions of Christianity you wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole, these days.
I wanted to point out that almost every Roman church in my region for the last 100+ years has had an icon of Our Mother of Perpetual Help in it. I live in the USA.
If I remember correctly, Romans are not allowed to cremate either except by a form of dispensation for grave reasons and they also cannot hold a funeral with the ashes. Sorry, but Father is mistaken. They'll have to do a memorial Mass only. I would go with the obsession with apparitions as not keeping with the faith over cremation if we're picking a point, personally.
OCA takes the same stance as the RCs, as someone in the comments pointed out!
In my observations.
The WR is an appeal to High Church Protestants and Trad Catholics.
People who already have a Liturgical Understanding and a familiarity of the Rite of St. Tikhon/St. Gregory.
Low Church Protestants and Novus Ordo Catholics will just jump straight to Russian/Greek Liturgical Traditions and openly embrace it.
The AWRV and the ROCOR WR are so few and far between, with ROCOR being very Zealous about strangeness creeping in and "Byzantifying" Parishes.
There's more than one issue I personally have with the expression of Piety within the WR but that's not for me to correct.
With the loss of Met. Joseph and Met. Tikhon there are few in Antioch and ROCOR that support the WR.
Fr. Patrick, What a lovely gentleman. May God Grant you and Austin Many Years. There is no “Eastern” in Orthodoxy, period. It is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church that simply survived the “sin of Schism” in the East and that accident of History shouldn’t be held against it today because there is no Culture in the Liturgy unless you make it so regardless of what language it is offered in. But!, unfortunately what you have is a lingering but diminishing flavor of sometimes vehement ethnic defenders. “This is a Greek Church why is there a Russian cross here?” But I have never found a priest from any tradition to be one. I’m a Mormon raised Catholic educated convert to Orthodoxy and have found a home for 35 years in the Orthodox Church. Our current church serves, Greeks, Romanians, Arabs, Eritrean, Hispanic, Ukrainians and me along with numerous other converts nearly seamlessly. The Serbian Bishop of Western America comes frequently and we welcomed the entire neighboring Russian Church when the Icon of the Theotokos from St. Tikhons Monastery visited. I see no difference in Latin traditions than any of the other cultures, languages of any other Orthodox Tradition. Orthodox has never so narrowly defined itself, but make no mistake the boundaries are firm and well defined and every tradition acknowledged by the Patriarchs as honoring those boundaries should be accepted without reservation or any asterisks whatsoever but as complete, equal and fully Orthodox. But likewise as any guest in anyone’s home we should be respectful of our hosts. That’s to say if you are welcomed as you are to say a Greek Church built by Greeks and attended by Greeks for decades or longer don’t enter it with intent to remove the ethnic components to it. That’s simple politeness and after all none of it is directed at you even though some may be more welcoming than others but isn’t that just life. However none of that slack should be extended to Clergy. If Clergy aren’t welcoming openly based on ethnicity they are neither serving Christ or his Church.
1:14:10 he completely denies enculturation. This is an ASTRONOMICALLY huge issue. The westerners may have the western rite, Indians the saint Thomas, what are you offering to Nigerians, Congolese, Fijians, Maasai, Chinese or Malays? And that is putting aside the multicultural and ethnic nature of America for one second.
This is myopic Anglo self importance, takes one to know one. He complains about the liturgy changing the “cult” culture… THATS THE POINT. And no, that won’t make you a nebulous “eastern” (dramatically different cultures for the record) it will make the culture Orthodox.
I don't think you heard him correctly. He's not talking about cultus as in the culture of a country. He refers to the environment people are spiritually nourished - the western rites are equal to the eastern ones in that regard, Pope St Leo, Pope St Gregory, St Ambrose, St Hilary, St Augustine, St Oswald, St Alban, St Dunstan - all these saints of the church and many many many more were raised and spiritually nourished by solely the western rite. That alone means that East and West are both equal in that regard, so why not want to bring that theological equality to the fore by endorsing the Western Rite, its the liturgy of the Latin Patristic patronage, which again, produced countless Saints of the Church so naturally its something we should desire more of. Its nothing about enculturation if anything he probably (though ill not speak as if I know what he wants!) WANTS enculturation, the significant amount of Orthodox Churches in the US are ran by GOARCH who, while I know many I deeply admire and respect in GOARCH, has a strong 'hellenistic' attitude with very little evangelism going on. The view of Orthodoxy being based along national lines and being cultural club isn't something people hear about for absolutely zero reasoning.
If people historically grew up around a Western Liturgical life then suddenly are thrust into an Eastern Liturgical life, which differs quite a bit in their emphasis, its only natural that many people can be and indeed are put off by these foreign practices. They're foreign and people genuinely, whether it's right or wrong, don't like to stick their necks into something foreign to them all of a sudden.
Austin you should look into using zencastr at least for your audio. With zencastr the audio is recorded locally so if you or your guest has a connection issue the audio quality for the finished production isn't degrated or lost. Love your work hope this helps keep the quality of your content high
Fr Patrick said he had to be Russian or Greek due to the sin of the schism.
I would say it's the same answer for a Catholic as well. Although there are Eastern Catholic churches in the US, I know many eastern Catholics who attend Latin Catholic parishes just because they are more widely available and close by. The eastern chruches are smaller and a nearest parish could be far way. And 98-99% of Catholics are Latin. So even many Catholics have to be Western/Latin for the most part even tho they are eastern.
Plus altho Byzantine Catholic churches are traditional ("eastern"), many of the other eastern rite churches are heavily latinized.
I got kicked out of Dyercord for defending Western devotional practices against Easterns.
I think a lot of Easterns in the US are former Protestants. They get the benefit of an ancient apostolic communion while still being able to hate Rome and the West.
I've definitely come across people that fit that description
what about the charismatics? is there room for expression of the Holy spirit in the orthodox church?
Charismatic movement is heresy
Being one who is currently in a "year of considering the East", Fr. Cardine had me near convinced until he started using an illustration that seems to imply that the Eastern Church is without flaw. I cannot abide a tradition that teaches it's tradition and structure is inerrant.
Im not sure if I understood correctly but the father saying that the Catholics don’t fast is just not true. In fact we are currently in the period of fasting for 40 days.
I love the western rite and am for it existing but I grow tired of the apologists for it insisting that following the traditional Constantinopolitan ("Byzantine") rite somehow means you are pretending to be a Greek or a Russian. It's misguided at best, and disingenuous at worst. The ritual is not ethnic and the case for it being ethnic cannot be made as the "Byzantine" rite has been practiced by a plurality of ethnicities for many centuries and unlike Americans today none of these people were confused about their ethnicity or identity, and most modern western converts to orthodoxy do not share this strange confusion of identity. If you go to a Russian parish and it feels foreign it may be because most of the people there are foreign immigrants and just different than you, sure. But what about when they're all American converts including the priest? What's the cope then? If the ritual feels foreign it's because of historical development and that Roman Catholic history is removed from this tradition after the schism, and Protestant history and tradition is even further removed and many Protestants today do not even have the concept of liturgy.
I go to a Greek parish that is probably 70-80% converts and I have never felt out of place participating in the services. Most if it is done in English and certain prayers are done in multiple languages like the Lord's Prayer. I don't necessarily see an issue with Western Rite but in my experience don't fully understand the need for it either.
To be honest, Western orhodox rite liturgy is one of the greatest liturgical and theological messes i have ever witnesses, blindly removed traditions and prayers of latin liturgy, sprinkled in eastern prayer practises, but what killed me was the tribule (censer) with the bells, For someone brought with both eastern and western rites (having dominicans, latin rite, copts, greek and russian orthodox) it was out of place as a monstrance on a football match
Treat this as opinion not analisis of rite.
I’ve never seen a censor with bells in a Western Rite Liturgy.
@@tonyrandall8703 I did. And it was awful. Worst thing is that they had normal western style censor
@@jerrypawlak2396 th-cam.com/users/clipUgkxEhO7pK36akaDHPwZQArfa9VIMQnLuMQa
@@jerrypawlak2396 I attend Fr. Patrick’s parish.
Imagine if there was some hierarchy which could approve or disapprove the same way except when bishops made requests almost like a head of the church on earth when bishops can’t go directly to Jesus for approval
I've felt that the existence of western rite you can see the diffrence between little t and big T traditions enough to know the diffrence between the theological truth of the orthodox faith and the theologically influenced practices of the orthodox church
Western rite Orthodoxy conforms more closely to the classic definition of uniatism as a ritual adjunct of a particular Church, than do the Eastern Catholic Churches today, which not only possess true autonomy and ecclesial status, but also have been enjoined to recover the fullness of their authentic Tradition--in contrast to the Western rite communities, which have been subjected to a process of "byzantinization" in the form of additions to their liturgy such as a consecratory epiclesis and a Byzantine-style pre-communion prayer.
In light of this, it's hard to take Orthodox criticism of uniatism with a straight face.
These are usually modified Western Rites. They are not 100% Western. That actually makes sense because the Orthodox churches are mostly based in the East.
@@roytofilovski9530 And that is precisely the argument that the Orthodoxy made against the heavily latinized Greek Catholics of the pre-Vatican II period---that we were only superficially Orthodox, but internally Roman Catholics. And, at the time, that may have been the case, though even before Vatican II, that mindset was changing. Since Vatican II--and especially in the past two decades, Greek Catholics have more fully embraced their authentic Tradition, the same Tradition maintained by the Eastern Orthodox. The Second Vatican Council recognized the identity of the Greek Catholics (and all the other Eastern Catholic Churches) as true Churches, with their own autonomous hierarchy, liturgy, spirituality, theology, doctrine and discipline.
This makes them fundamentally different from "Western rite Orthodoxy", which is NOT organized as true particularly Churches, but as mere ritual adjuncts or "rites" of an Eastern Orthodox Church. The do not have an independent hierarchy, nor are they free to theologize in its own (Western) Tradition, and its liturgies have been bowdlerized to accommodate Eastern Orthodox sensibilities (e.g., with the inclusion of an explicit consecratory epiclesis, and the addition or Orthodox-style pre-communion prayers). They are, in shore, the Orthodox equivalent of "Uniates", although we "Uniates" are far more independent and authentic than Western rite Orthodoxy. Which, of course, puts lie to all the calumnies that too frequently are directed against Greek Catholics by ill-informed members of Eastern Orthodox Churches.
@@StuartKoehl WR Orthodox do not want to be independent, so frankly I don't get your point tbh. And Greek Catholics are not Orthodox, they are Catholic......
@@StuartKoehl There are also not enough WR Orthodox for them to have their own autocephalus church. At least not in the medium term.
@@roytofilovski9530 There are only about 2500 Russian Greek Catholics, and an equal number of Hellenic Catholics. Numbers are not important, but ecclesial status is. That was the whole argument against "uniatism"--that they weren't true Churches, merely rites whose liturgy, theology, spirituality, doctrine and discipline were all deeply influenced by their mother Church. Now, we Greek Catholics look to the Orthodox as our Mother Churches, and back to them, one day, we hope to return.
Incredible interview. I would like to have a priest/spiritual father like him!
I am curious what Fr. Patrick meant when he compared the western view of treasury of merits vs the eastern view of merits. Very curious what the difference is!
I'd love to do a video just on the topic of merit
Since I learned about Western Rite, I have to say that on the one hand I think it makes sense to have a rite which is indigenous to the West and which reflects the West's lost Orthodoxy. On the other hand though, the reintroduction of the Sarum Rite in Orthodox circles is a modern development as far as I know, and I'm afraid that it might be aimed too much at poaching Catholics who may have a temporary disagreement with their church or at introducing Latin Christianity to the Orthodox.
This is why I can't wait for this video and to see what I might learn from it!
I hope it proves to be a helpful video for you!
Yeah that is my critique of the WR. Since it seems that the WR doesn’t have a organic concrete history that is from a western heritage that Latin Rite Catholics can claim. It can seem from someone from the outside that the WR came from the hierarchy with just eastern heritage only.
An analogy would be: suppose that the Catholic Church was only composed of the Latin Church and no Eastern Catholic Churches. One day Rome decides to allow/support Catholics by adopting and modifying an Eastern Liturgy that was once Catholic, but were corrupted by the Orthodox. So we have This Eastern Catholic Church that doesn’t have a eastern heritage.
@ScottishSlav(formerly Ed of the Dead) This ^
@ScottishSlav(formerly Ed of the Dead) I think the distinction between WR and the Uniates that can be made is: The Uniates were former Orthodox that entered into Communion with Rome, thus they came from an eastern heritage and continued that eastern heritage. Not Catholics that came from a western heritage. The Uniates would be like if the entire patriarchate of Constantinople entered back into union with Rome, or a Bishop and his diocese. Rome didn’t have Catholics establish an Eastern Rite Catholic Church that came from an Western heritage. The eastern Catholics came from an eastern heritage, and not from a western heritage. Hence why they are not under Latin bishops, but their own eastern bishops and canon laws.
While the WR came from Eastern hierarchy, and who are still under eastern bishops. Which can seem that we have eastern bishops just claiming another heritage that is different than their own for those orthodox who prefer the western liturgy. It seems odd from a historical standpoint.
@@baoduong2203The Maronites were never Eastern Orthodox. They are 2000 years in unbroken communion with Rome. Besides, there are “uniates” that came to the Church not only from the (Greek/Byzantine) Eastern Orthodox world in schism, but also came from the Assyrian Church of the East (like Syro-Malabar Catholics and Chaldean Catholics) or Oriental Orthodoxy (like Malankara Indian Catholics and Ethiopian Catholics).
Thank you both. Very informative
Glad you enjoyed it!
Also the idea of having organs in houses of ill repute is hilarious
It would be interesting to see how similar the western orthodox rite is to Anglo catholic Solemn Mass
I had a look and it is almost identical. Just no Filioque
I myself became RC after 8 years of trying to deal with EO peculiarities. Eventually, the anti-west attitude was too much (and frankly anti-Christian). I later saw that this hatred resulted in denying the faith to-own-the-Latins; I am now much more comfortable in RC theology, so I owe them that.
What is this attitude in Orthodoxy that you can call anti-Christian?at least I can imagine what you mean by talking about anti-Western relations, but I also can't understand how you didn't see it as a fight against sin, sinful politics, etc. I live in Russia, and all that can be heard in the Orthodox Church are words like that Western Christian civilization has lost its Christianity, with references to today's agenda, culture, and ideology. And I would like to ask you how you reconciled with the infallibility of the pope and the changed symbol of faith. Sorry in advance if there are errors here (used a translator)
Dude, you've been peddling this lie for over a year now. No Orthodox Parish community speaks this way. No Orthodox Priest or Bishop would tell you our faith is inherently anti-western. If you really did convert for a time your story would indicate you spent more time learning the faith from internet edgelords and not a Parish Priest. Which is a spiritual delusion in of itself.
@@bradenrice8460 You don’t know me, but you’re quick to call a liar.
@@БондарьВСеволод Not everything in the west is orthodox Catholic (Roman or otherwise) practice.
The condemnation of the Roman church isn’t merely sin. It’s about fighting a strawman to inflate the EO ego.
The Orthodox Church is more supportive of traditional western liturgy than the Roman church! Lol!
SSPX, FSSP, ICKSP: 👀
@@AveChristusRex yes but didn’t the pope come out and basically “outlaw” those liturgies?
For me I do like orthodoxy, but really love many of the western pre-schism saints, especially on the British isles (Cuthbert, David of Wales, Thaney, Nonnita, Bede, Ita, etc…).Even some after 1095(St Francis).
Love God, Love others. Change the world.😉
Bought Augustine’s City of God, confessions (per Fr Seraphim Rose’s praise for the books), and the consolation of philosophy by Boethuis.
Look forward to reading them.
St Patrick! There is an icon of him next to door to the Nave.
Saint Tiberieus
God is always bigger than the boxes we built for God, so we shouldn’t waste so much time protecting the boxes.
Richard Rohr
Well, Jesus is the head of so called box, and he has one body not many, a body divided against itself can not stand
@@cameron4339 “The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!””
1 Corinthians 12:21 NIV
@@davidvartanian indeed, there is only one church not a "invisable church" Christ made it clear that their is a visable church, Christ is the head of the church (Colossians 2:13-18) if the church was invisable only well their is no reason to correct mormons or Jw's, or other denominations, Matthew 7:22 states Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?" God does care what you believe, if he did not he would be counterdicting himself
@@davidvartanian we need to obey Christ, and obeying Christ is to fallow his church, one holy Catholic, Apostolict, Orthodox Church
@@cameron4339 “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.”
Colossians 2:16-17 NIV
You’re a good kid
14:09 it feels like stepping into a 13th century Canterbury garden
Good job Austin! 👍
let's keep it Catholic (universal) and Orthodox (true to the roots). how i wish there would be a Western Orthodox Rite here in the Philippines.
“What I believe is pure and clear. What I don’t believe is icky”
sounds reasonable 🙄🙄
Does anyone know which western liturgy (mass) does the orthodox western rite perform? I would think it would be a pre-schism liturgy (mass), and specifically not a post 1570 Tridentine mass approved by Pope Pius V?
Liturgy of Gregory the Great I believe
Some use the Sarum Rite.
Also the Liturgy of St Tikhon is used, which is a modified English usage.
My parish is Gregorian rite