Replies

But whose version? There is Roman Catholic and then there are the Orthodox who will tell you they are the original and true Catholic church? Sheesh, it never ends.

Meanwhile, I often think of Ghandi’s statements that he really liked Jesus but it was His followers that he had issues with. I would say the same of the Catholic Church. There is great beauty in the rituals and meaning of the Catholic Church. I love their traditions, and even their continuity (since I don’t give much credence to the rebels who want to have gay marriage, etc. okayed). However, wowee, when I think of all the Catholics I know and how they live their lives on a DAILY basis...it’s very scary. Of course, are they REALLY Catholic?

But whose version? There is Roman Catholic and then there are the Orthodox who will tell you they are the original and true Catholic church? Sheesh, it never ends.

Most Orthodox I know tend to view "Latins" as members of the Catholic Church as they view themselves. I actually know of only three areas of dispute between Latins and Orthodox:

Papal Primacy: the early Church councils established five patriarchs to act as shepherds for different regions of the world. Originally, there was Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria. Constantinople, which was not really established at the first council, was added (as it was the "new Rome"). And then Jerusalem. Rome was always viewed as having primacy. This is acknowledged by both east and west. The difference is that the East regards this as a position of honor (who gets to sit at the end of the table), while the west regards this as a practical role of governance. For most Orthodox I know, this is not really a huge issue in these days, because of how Rome has interacted with the Eastern Churches in communion with the Holy Father -- that, in experience, they have been shown to be sui juris.
The filoque: the Creed said in the Latin liturgy states: I believe in the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. The Original Nicene-Constantipolitan creed does not have the "and the Son" phrase, as highlighted. This was the cause listed for the schism of 1054. (In fact, there is a video out there of the Holy Father saying the Creed with ++Bartholomew, without the "filoque" in it.
original sin: Latins regard this as a loss of the original grace as a result of the fall. Orthodox, to my understanding, regard it as damage to human nature. Where this becomes significant is in the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Latins believe that Mary, at the moment of her conception, in anticipation of the redemption of Christ, was given that grace (almost as if she was baptized while merely a fertilized egg...again, in anticipation of what Christ would make available to all of us). The Orthodox regard that as non-sensical because of their different view of original sin.

I remember my daughter, several years ago, had a female friend who was Russian Orthodox (her grandmother and grandfather escaped from Stalinist Russia). When we first met her grandmother, a very pious woman, the topic turned to the Faith. A comment she made to us that I remember to this day was, "well, you're not Orthodox, but at least you Latins are real Christians." While I would doubt that I'd run into many who were that blunt, I think that is the view that the majority of Orthodox I've met would hold toward Latins.

However, wowee, when I think of all the Catholics I know and how they live their lives on a DAILY basis...it’s very scary. Of course, are they REALLY Catholic?

Interesting thing about Christ's Church (whether you regard it as the Latin and Eastern Church views it or the "invisible Church" thing adopted by Protestants): the Church is Holy, established by Christ, and guided/protected by the Holy Spirit. However, the Church is made up of men (a/k/a homo sapiens). The Bible reveals to us exactly how we men are. The very fact that there is still a Church at all after 2,000+ years is a testament in of itself.

I agree that we all, myself included, should strive to live the Gospel far more than we do.