(Polished and expanded a little on 18 January 2008.)

How can Orthodoxy possibly dovetail with liberal Roman Catholicism?

  • Collegiality and conciliarity; no Papal Infallibility. While the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople has some very supportive supporters, he’s really not supposed to be a worldwide ecclesiastical autocrat, merely “first among equals” among the bishops of the Orthodox Church, permanent chairman if you will. The Primates of Orthodoxy’s regional and national Synods wield alot of influence therein – some of it comes from being effectively CEOs of denominations – but they can still be challenged, even driven from power ‘from below,’ as recently happened with the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and a few years ago with a Greek Archbishop of America. And as far as “faith and morals” go, we place our trust in Holy Tradition, not the decrees of individual Patriarchs.
  • Spirituality. See my early posts about God’s Uncreated Divine Energies, Light, etc.
  • Contraception. You’re supposed to talk it over with your priest, but it’s not the automatic sentence of mortal sin and eternal damnation like it is in the RCC … though some disagree, and are free to.
  • A sense of Church History. We’re not afraid to find out that our Patriarchs’ posts evolved, or that monks and laity overruled some Church Councils. Actually Church history is often liberating!
  • Deaconesses. See here.
  • Collaborative ministry. From the parish to the ecumenical council, priests and bishops are within their churches, not above them. Laity and lower clergy, even lay theologians, have always had a key role in the life of the Church. In some jurisdictions they even help select bishops, primates,* and patriarchs (as seen in 2007 in Romania), did anciently, sometimes since then, and may do so more again soon, for instance in the Moscow Patriarchate, whose 1917-1918 council authorized the practice as represented now in The Orthodox Church in America (OCA). (*–The Archbishop of Cyprus’ election has a very “American” feel, with campaigning, the equivalent of primaries, the election of an Electoral College, controversy, secular media coverage….)
  • Liturgy. It may be long, but it’s great, beautiful, magnificent, etc. etc.!
  • ‘Physical’ worship. All five senses adore the Lord in Orthodox worship; the whole body is involved, even more than in the Mass.
  • Real theology. Like I’ve said before, theology has really fallen apart in the West; some trace it all the way back to Augustine of Hippo. I’ve had 9 years of parochial school, 5 years of minor seminary and novitiate, 4 years with a minor in Theology, 6 years of grad school in Western theology … and still, every time I read Orthodox Theology, it’s a revelation!
  • Art and architecture. There’s nothing like Orthodox icons and churches.
  • Music. Good Byzantine or Russian chant just might cure you of the need for guitars!
  • Divorce and remarriage; a pastoral sense, non-legalism. We don’t bother with annulment, but your bishop can grant an ecclesiastical divorce, clearing the way for up to 2 more marriages. Despite (or Because of?!) being “orthodox,” we have a reputation for leniency, compassion in pastoral practice. It’s called economy, in Greek oikonomia, the opposite of acriveia or strictness, and called into play when an exception may be necessary rather than fear losing a soul’s salvation.
  • Patristics, incl. patristic social justice. The Fathers and Mothers of the Church are the source of the best Orthodox theology (though even “100 pct. of the Fathers are 85 pct. right!”). And how’s this for social justice?: “The bread in your cupboard belongs to the hungry man; the coat hanging unused in your closet belongs to the man who needs it; the shoes rotting in your closet belong to the man who has no shoes; the money which you put in the bank belongs to the poor. You do wrong to everyone you could help but fail to help” (St. Basil the Great).

A Fundamentalist who converted to the Latin Church wrote a book entitled Rome Sweet Home. I might call mine New Rome, Sweet Home: A Liberal Catholic Discovers Orthodoxy! (New Rome was the official name of Constantinople or Byzantium.)


  1. TLewis

    Liberal Catholicism is the denial of the merging of two dogmas that are in opposition to each other. Liberalism is the dogmatic affirmation of the absolute independence of the individual and of social reason. Catholicity is the dogma of the absolute subjection of the individual and of the social order to the revealed law of God.

    Liberalism is a heresy in the doctrinal order because heresy is the formal and obstinate denial of all Christian dogmas in general.

    Liberalism repudiates dogma altogether and substitutes opinion, whether that opinion be doctrinal or the negation of doctrine. Nonetheless Liberalism is in itself dogmatic; and it is in the declaration of its own fundamental dogma, the absolute independence of the individual and the social reason, that it denies all Christian dogma in general.

    Liberalism knows no dogma except the dogma of self-assertion.

    Liberalism is simply the Dogma stated by the first fallen angel who said “I will not serve.”

    Liberalism and Free Thinkers or Freemasons have much in common.

    Liberal Catholicism is an Oxymoron, rendering an incoherent Dogma, and thus its contentment rest not in reason but rather rest upon the appetites of feelings. Since the love of God held by Liberal Catholics is merely a temporary appetite, this love of God is only present during the presents of the Liberal Catholics appetite or feeling towards God.

    This temporary feeling has historically been defined as concupiscence, cupidity or complacency for the things we have not. Many great persons have been of opinion that love is no other thing than complacency itself, in which they have had much appearance of reason. Unfortunately as soon as complacency ceases love of God also ceases.

    Therefore Liberal Catholics do not truly love God, but rather are complacent as a result of their reasoning that their feelings towards God are their love for God. What is absent is the will to love God when there is no complacency, when feelings are withdrawn, and the will suffers the lack of complacency desiring to love God beyond the passions of the body, but rather by the action and movement of the soul.

  2. Oh well, so much for G.K. Chesterton, who was a life-long Liberal!

    But when I hear people talking about “Liberal Catholicism” I immediately think of the Liberal Catholic Church, which is a kind of liturgical theosophy, and they appear to believe that it doesn’t matter what you believe — as long as you do it with incense.




Leave a Comment