Stephen in South Carolina, listening on the Catholic Answers app, you are on with
Trent Horn, what is your objection to the faith that you would like Trent to
address? Oh crap, I'm actually on the air, this is cool. I'm sorry, I'm a big fan.
We enjoy the enthusiasm, let's keep it PG though. Nowadays that probably
is PG. I guess you're right. Go ahead Stephen, you're fine.
I'm sorry, I was just a little excited. But anyway, I just want to know,
Mr. Horn, this isn't about Christianity in
particular but about Catholicism in particular: what are your objections to
the more Orthodox traditions like the Greek Orthodox tradition? So you're
referring to Eastern Orthodoxy? Because the word "Orthodox" can be used in one of
two ways. Typically orthodoxy would mean fidelity to the deposit of faith.
So that's "orthodox" with a lowercase "o."
What we're talking about here is the Orthodox, capital "O," those who are the
successors of Eastern Churches that broke away from the Catholic Church in
the 11th century, that were once united under the few patriarchs but now have
split along national lines. Things like the Greek Orthodox,
I believe the Russian Orthodox is the largest of the Orthodox churches, and
different--Armenian Orthodox, things like that. One thing I will say, and what the
Catholic Church does say, is of all the non-Catholic Christians in the world, the
Eastern Orthodox are probably the closest ones, doctrinally, to the Catholic
Church. They still have valid orders, it's possible under certain circumstances for
Catholics to receive the Eucharist at Eastern Orthodox liturgies, so they still
have, you know, valid orders, valid Eucharist, so they're very very
close. I would say the biggest objections, or what is what, you know, would be
separating Catholics and the Orthodox, one would be a
matter of theology--well, they're all matters of theology; one would be what's called the "Filioque,"
which is an item in the Nicene Creed that was added at a later time that deals
with the procession of the Holy Spirit, whether it proceeds from the Father
alone or from the Father and the Son, though even the Catechism says that you
can express it--express this truth in different ways, as long as it's not done
rigidly, to accommodate how the Orthodox feel about this, because everything the
Son has, if the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son everything the Son has
ultimately comes from the Father anyways. That's minor--not minor, it's still a
major point of contention. The larger objection, though, would probably be the
issue of the Papacy. I would say that the biggest thing separating Catholics
from the Eastern Orthodox would be the question of the Bishop of Rome: what
authority does he have? The Eastern Orthodox tend to say that the Bishop of
Rome has a primacy of honor, or he is a first among equals,
so the Bishop of Rome has a very special place, being the successor of Peter, but
he is not the pastor of the entire Church and he has not been endowed with
the charism of infallibility, for example. So I would say that's the the biggest
difference, and dialogue between Eastern Orthodox and Catholics has to, I think
ultimately, is gonna talk a lot about the Papacy in that regard. So is that a
helpful answer to your question? I just want to make sure I have it 100%. The biggest
difference is the Papacy, and of course the Catholic Church teaches that St.
Peter was, how would I phrase it...that he was-- Saint Peter was given the responsibility
of being the pastor of the entire Church and was endowed with the charism of
infallibility. We see this in scripture when Jesus prays for Peter's faith, and
then tells Peter to strengthen his brothers as well, and this particular
office that Peter had of being the leader of the early Church and being
given the charism of an infallibility, which is--the Church as a whole shares
this, but Peter and his successors share it in a special way--was passed on so
that there is, just as in the Old Testament Israel had a prime
minister who served under the king, when Jesus founded his Church He chose one of
the Apostles to be his vicar or a prime minister, if you will, to have authority
over the others, to ratify ecumenical councils, for example. So I think the
papacy would probably be the biggest difference, though there are others, such
as the issue of Filioque and the Trinity and things like that. I would recommend a
great book, if you would like to learn more about this issue, would be "Rome and
the Eastern Churches," it's by a Dominican named Aidan Nichols, "N-I-C-H-O-L-S," Aidan
Nichols, "Rome and the Eastern Churches." Also James Likoudis, I think, has a
little book on this called "Ending the Greek Schism" that I'd also recommend. So
thank you very much for calling.