As a Byzantine Catholic I have chosen to do a reflection on the document Orientalium Ecclesiarum of the Second Vatican Council, because I see it as an affirmation of the Eastern or Byzantine Tradition as distinct from the theological tradition of the Latin Church.  In my paper I will focus on two main points: (1) the necessary reaffirmation of the Eastern tradition by the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome, which involves the restoration of their legitimate autonomy and a renewed focus upon their distinctive theological and doctrinal patrimony, and (2) that through the process of de-latinization the Eastern Catholic Churches will become in all things like the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and in this way help to manifest to Orthodox Christians the fact that communion with the See of Rome does not require the repudiation of the Byzantine spiritual, liturgical, theological, and doctrinal tradition.  In other words, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council emphasize the legitimate diversity of liturgical and theological traditions within the one Catholic Church, while also accepting the full ecclesial status of the Eastern Catholic Churches as true particular Churches distinct from the Latin Church. 

          Now of course from these two points many initiatives have had to be undertaken in the post-Conciliar period in order to properly implement the document; and in the process allowing it to bear fruit within the post-Conciliar Catholic Church.  Some of these initiatives have been hard for Latin Catholics to accept, because they have grown accustomed to dominating the Church in the past, and so the proper implementation of the document has required, and continues to require, a program of education within the Latin Church itself about the differences, spiritual and doctrinal, that exist between the East and the West.  This process of education about the distinctive features of Byzantine theology and tradition has helped some of the members of the Latin Church to understand better the actions of their Byzantine brothers as they expunge the various latinizations that have been forced upon Eastern Churches over the last few centuries. [1]  Ultimately, this process of de-latinization will be a great ecumenical gift to the whole Church, for it will hopefully show the Eastern Orthodox Churches that it is possible to be fully and completely Byzantine, while simultaneously being in communion with the Pope.

          Now in order to achieve this goal the Council Fathers began their treatment of the Eastern Churches by recognizing their unique value as particular Churches, and as distinct families of rites.  That being said, the Eastern Churches must not be reduced to mere liturgical rites, because they are in fact true and proper distinct particular Churches with their own theological and liturgical understanding of the Christian Mystery.  This openness to diversity by the Council Fathers has allowed the Eastern Churches to once again emphasize the distinctive features of Byzantine theology, which has always been focused primarily upon man’s divinization by grace through his participation in the uncreated divine energies.  The Reformation arguments about justification never had any impact upon the Eastern Churches, for they have never reduced the mystery of salvation to legal categories of thought.  Thus, the doctrine of grace as divine energy, that is, the doctrine of grace as God’s existence outside of His ineffable and incomprehensible essence is and must be central to understanding the nature of the liturgical and sacramental life of the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches. 

          Now with this renewed emphasis in Catholic ecclesiology, it is possible to move away from a simple recognition of the Eastern Churches as distinct liturgical rites, to an acceptance of them as true sui juris particular Churches, with their own autonomous and self-governing hierarchies.  This recognition by the Council Fathers leads of course to the later emphasis upon the Church understood as a communion of particular Churches in the one Catholic Church, with the Pope as the visible head and sign of unity among all Christians. 

          Clearly this is a distinct theological improvement over the previous understanding of the relationship that should exist between the East and West, because the Council Fathers finally recognized the fact that the Eastern Churches are distinct particular Churches in their own right and that they are “. . . of equal rank, so that none of the them are superior to the other because of its rite.” [2]  This recognition is vital to understanding the resurgence of the Eastern Churches since the close of the Council, for they no longer see themselves, nor are they held to be by the Catholic Church, simply “rites” within the one Church, but are in fact true particular Churches in communion with the See of Rome.  From this it follows that they are no longer to be placed in the shadow of the Latin Church, but must stand as equals in relation to the Western Church.  This idea is a clear break with the previous understanding of the relationship between the Latin Church and the Eastern Churches, because the Eastern Churches had often been seen as somehow deficient in relation to the Latin Church, both liturgically and doctrinally, and so this document finally and definitively overcomes that ecclesiological bias.

          Based on the teaching of the Council presented in the opening part of the document, it becomes the duty of the Roman Pontiff in particular, because of his universal office, is to ensure the advancement of the Eastern Churches throughout the world. [3]   In order to accomplish this important task it is first necessary that members of the Western Church, both clergy and laity, be educated about the distinctive nature of the practices and beliefs of the Eastern Churches, and this involves a willingness on the part of Westerners to allow for different formulations of doctrine based upon the Byzantine experience of the Christian Mystery. [4] 

          This process of education requires a proper understanding on the part of the faithful of the necessary theological and doctrinal diversity within the Church, which ultimately allows for a richer form of unity within the one Catholic Church than the previous Scholastic focus of theology prior to the Council had allowed.  In other words, unity of faith and practice does not mean that the Eastern Churches must accept a Scholastic understanding of the faith as it was worked out by the Western Church on its own during the high middle ages; rather, the Eastern Churches must emphasize that which conforms to the Byzantine formulation of the doctrinal patrimony of the Church, highlighting the distinctive doctrines and liturgical practices which differentiate them from the Latin Church, while still giving a proper devotion to the Pope as the visible head and sign of unity within the Church. [5]

          Integral to the recognition of the sui juris status of the Eastern Churches is the acceptance of their legitimate self-governance.  The Council Fathers emphasized this aspect of the nature of the Church as communion by speaking of the Patriarchal structure of the Eastern Churches and how this type of governing structure, which is based on the ancient canons of the undivided Church, must be embraced and reaffirmed by the members of the Catholic Church as a whole.  Now, although Orientalium Ecclesiarum continues – at least to a certain degree – the practice of referring to the sui juris Churches of the East as “rites,” it is important to note that the theology underlying the document is better represented by the post-Conciliar recognition of the sui juris status of the Eastern Churches within canon law, and this is reflected in the document when it emphasizes that the Eastern Patriarchs, “with their synods are the highest authority for all business of the patriarchate, not excepting the right of setting up new eparchies and appointing bishops of their rite within the patriarchal territory, without prejudice to the inalienable right of the Roman Pontiff to intervene in any particular case.” [6] 

          In other words, the Patriarch and the holy synod of the Church are alone responsible for the governance of the particular Church entrusted to their care by Almighty God, with due deference to be paid to the Pope in exceptional and particular cases when for the good of the whole Church his intervention is required. [7]  Moreover, with an eye to the future growth of the Eastern Churches, the Council Fathers called for the establishment, according to proper custom, of new patriarchates when necessary.  It should be noted that within the past year the Ukrainian Catholic Church has declared Major Archbishop Lubamyr Husar of Kiev as its Patriarch, and the Holy Synod of the Ukrainian Church is now awaiting the Pope’s confirmation of this action.

          A part of the document on the Eastern Churches also focuses upon how they celebrate divine worship.  In particular it speaks to Eastern practice in relation to the sacraments of initiation, because in the East, unlike the West, the sacraments of initiation are celebrated as a unified whole, and so a child is baptized, chrismated, and receives first holy communion, all during the same ceremony. [8]  Moreover, in the Eastern Churches the minister of the sacrament of marriage is held to be the priest; and so, although matrimonial consent is held to be necessary for a valid sacramental marriage, the consent of the couple is not seen as sufficient for a sacramental marriage, because the priest must give his blessing to the couple for the marriage to be valid. [9] 

          There are other theological and doctrinal differences between East and West on sacramental issues, and these differences are not to be seen as hindrances to communion between the Latin Church and the Byzantine Churches, but must instead be seen as an expression of the legitimate diversity present within the one Catholic Church, because the nature of the divine mysteries revealed in Christ cannot be exhausted by any one doctrinal or theological tradition.

          Therefore, the diverse ways of looking at the Christian Mystery are all a part of the process of de-latinization within the Eastern Churches, for they have been called upon by the Council Fathers to restore their ancient heritage. [10]  In other words, the various doctrines of the East, that is, the omission of the filioque in the Nicene Creed, the distinction between essence and energy in God, the focus upon divinization as salvation, the theology of grace as divine energy, the Eastern understanding of predestination which focuses upon the distinction between nature and hypostasis, the focus upon icons in worship, and many other unique doctrines of the Eastern Church, must be restored to the life and practice of the Eastern Catholic Churches; so that, in all things they are as much like their Eastern Orthodox brothers as is possible.  In this way the Eastern Catholic Churches can serve as a true sign of the ecumenical spirit and of dialogue between the Catholic Church and the separated Eastern Orthodox Churches.

          Now clearly, the process of de-latinization that has been the focus of the Eastern Churches over the past forty years is meant as a support for what the Council Fathers had to say in the concluding portion of Orientalium Ecclesiarum, because it is in the closing part of the document that the Council focuses its attention on the issue of ecumenism between the Catholic East and the Orthodox East.  If the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome can successfully achieve de-latinization, it will be a sign of, and witness to, the fact that communion with the Pope is not inherently inimical to the Byzantine doctrinal and liturgical tradition.  In other words, it will show the Eastern Orthodox Churches that they too can come back into communion with the Apostolic See and not give up that which makes them truly unique.  It is the duty of the Eastern Catholic Churches to show that they can be in communion with Rome, while they simultaneously maintain their own Byzantine and Eastern doctrines and traditions. [11]

          The Eastern Catholic Churches have been given a special mandate by the Council Fathers in the area of ecumenism among all Christians, but particularly with the Christian East.  So by living as Eastern Christians in full communion with the Bishop of Rome the Eastern Catholic Churches can be an eschatological sign of the restoration of communion between the Catholic Church and the whole of the Orthodox East.  Thus, this positive achievement of the Second Vatican Council must be seen as pivotal in moving the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church in a new direction, or rather, in a direction which reaffirmed the ancient understanding of the one Catholic and Apostolic Church as a communion of particular Churches.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Works Cited:

Fr. Austin Flannery.  Vatican Council II:  The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents.  (New York:  Costello Publishing Company, 1987).  Pages 441-451.

Works Consulted:

Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC].  (New York:  The Catholic Book Publishing Company, 1994).

Reflection Paper:  Orientalium Ecclesiarum the Magna Carta of the Eastern Churches

by Steven Todd Kaster

Franciscan University of Steubenville

Theology 604:  The Teachings of Vatican II

Dr. Shreck

9 September 2005

_____________________________________

End Notes:

[1] See OE 6; the necessity of de-latinization within the Eastern Churches follows from the teaching of the Council Fathers that:  “All the members of the Eastern Churches should be firmly convinced that they can and ought always preserve their own legitimate liturgical rites and ways of life, and that changes are to be introduced only to forward their own organic development.  They themselves are to carry out all these prescriptions with the greatest fidelity.  They are to aim always at a more perfect knowledge and practice of their rites, and if they have fallen away due to circumstances of times or persons, they are to strive to return to their ancestral traditions.”

[2] OE 3.

[3] See OE 3.

[4] See OE 6.

[5] See OE 6; the Council Fathers state that, “Those who by reason of their office or apostolic ministry have frequent dealings with the Eastern Churches or their faithful should be instructed as their office demands in theoretical and practical knowledge of the rites, discipline, doctrine, history and character of the members of the Eastern Churches.”

[6] OE 9.

[7] See OE 7 and OE 9.

[8] See OE 13 and OE 14.

[9] See OE 18; see also the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1623:  “According to Latin tradition, the spouses as ministers of Christ's grace mutually confer upon each other the sacrament of Matrimony by expressing their consent before the Church. In the tradition of the Eastern Churches, the priests (bishops or presbyters) are witnesses to the mutual consent given by the spouses, but for the validity of the sacrament their blessing is also necessary.”

[10] See OE 6.

[11] See OE 6.

Copyright © 2005-2024 Steven Todd Kaster