The Journey Home: James Likoudis' Conversion from Eastern Orthodoxy to Catholicism (2/6)

James Likoudis is a former Eastern Orthodox who converted to Catholicism. He aired in the program The Journey Home with Marcus Grodi of EWTN to share with us his conversion experience. Likoudis is author of "Ending the Byzantine Greek Schism" and "The Divine Primacy of the Bishop of Rome and Modern Eastern Orthodoxy: Letters to a Greek Orthodox on the Unity of the Church." For more information on James Likoudis, please visit his website:
http://credo.stormloader.com/jlindex.htm
and for information on the show The Journey Home, please visit the following link:
http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/searchprog.asp

Category:

Education

Tags:

• The
• Journey
• Home
• James
• Likoudis
• Papacy
• Catholicism
• Eastern
• Orthodox
• Schism
• Conversion
• Marcus
• Grodi
• EWTN

[KabaneTheChristian]

@Mkvine

...the Pope has a fundamentally different kind of jurisdiction over local Churches outside his own than Archbishops do for local Churches outside their own. And this is our issue. It is the result of an improper, non-Eucharistic ecclesiology that does not take into account the full catholicity of the local Church, even if Rome says that they do.

[KabaneTheChristian]

@Mkvine

...of jurisdiction than the bishop of the local Church. Unless the Pope presides at the Eucharistic Table for all the Churches, and the bishops serve only as vicars of the Pope (something Rome adamantly denies), then the Pope's immediate jurisdiction over all local Churches makes no sense. Roman Catholic apologists try to depict it as if the Pope, for them, sits at the top of the jurisdictional pyramid for the Church. This is just false. For Roman Catholics...

[KabaneTheChristian]

@Mkvine

And this headship is established through his presiding at the Eucharistic Table. The bishop is the vicar of Christ because he sacramentally acts in the person of Christ. Even according to Rome, you can have a valid bishop apart from communion with the Pope. But if this is true, how is the Pope's universal headship established? The bishop serves as head because he presides at the Eucharistic Table for the local Church. This is why the Archbishop has a fundamentally different type...

[KabaneTheChristian]

@Mkvine

But you do divide it when you talk of the Pope being the head of the Church militant but not of the Church triumphant. The bishop of every Orthodox Christian, those reposed and those still with us, is Christ. On Earth, that High Priesthood of Christ is manifested through a local bishop. Rome says that bishops are governors of "parts of the Universal Church." Actually, the bishop is the head of the Catholic Church as it is manifested in a particular locality.

[KabaneTheChristian]

@Mkvine

Actually, this is just what "primacy of honor" means. An Archbishop has a primacy of honor on the Holy Synod. Likoudis just doesn't understand what the term means according to historic Orthodoxy.

[Mkvine]

@Mkvine

In the same way, we would also never say the Son is fully God apart from the the two other Divine Persons.

[Mkvine]

@KabaneTheChristian

What I would say, Kabane, is that we must approach this from a "both/and" perspective. Yes the local church is the full manifestation of the Catholic Church, but it also exist within the entire Catholic Church in heaven and on earth. The Church is the mystical body of Christ, we cannot divide it into parts. As an analogy, just think of the Trinity. All persons are fully God, and belong to the One Godhead, but we would never think of saying the Son is "part" of the Godhead.

[Mkvine]

@KabaneTheChristian

Kabane, given that you believe the Pope does have jurisdiction over all the churches, would you then be fine with saying that the primacy that the Pope holds its not just a primacy of honor but also a primacy of jurisdiction, such that the jurisdiction is understood to be mediately? In regards to the question of authority, yes this is the dispute, but like I said, I really don't feel like getting into a never ending discussion on this at the moment.

[KabaneTheChristian]

@Mkvine

What needs to be acknowledged is that the local Church is not just a "part" of the Catholic Church. Rather, it IS the Catholic Church, manifested in a particular locale. Yes, the Churches should hold Eucharistic communion with each other for the sake of Christian unity, and this is normatively the case, but even when Eucharistic communion is temporarily broken (and the break doesn't become systemic), both local Churches can still manifest the Catholic Church of Christ.

[KabaneTheChristian]

@Mkvine

I think it's denied because of the specific connotations that "Head of the Church" implies in Roman Catholic circles, namely, ordinary, immediate, and universal jurisdiction over every local Church. If we understand "Head of the Church" in the sense of AC 34 and in the sense that the Synods of the Church used it, there is no problem whatsoever.

And you're right that the Pope exercised authority, but what KIND of authority? That's the real dispute between Rome and Orthodoxy.