Byzantine Catholic and sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter LNL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LNL said:
I grew up Roman Catholic and my husband grew up Byzantine Catholic. We had decided to raise our family in his Byzantine Catholic Church. I am more educated on the Latin rite view of mortal and venial sins and that one needs to be free of mortal sin to receive communion. Is this the same view in the Byzantine rite? The prayer we say before communion we ask God for the forgiveness of all our sins. I do go to confession at the Roman Catholic Church we’ve gone to because of my familiarity with it. I hope to go to make the switch to our Byzantine Parish soon. I am Trying to learn the differences between the two rites and am having trouble finding a direct answer. Thank you in advance for your comments!
Click to expand...
The eastern canon law (CCEO 719) states that one aware of serious sin, confess it as soon as possible, and the Latin canon law that states confession of less than serious sin (CIC 988, 2) is merely recommended, not required. Serious sin should be confessed either as soon as possible (eastern practice) or annually (Latin practice). Latin mortal sin is serious sin. In the Byzantine Catholic Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom the Celebrant prays for forgiveness of both material (involuntary) and actual (voluntary) offences, in the Prayer of the Thrice Holy Hymn:
“Forgive us every offense, voluntary and involuntary; sanctify us, soul and body; and grant that we may worship you in holiness all the days of our life, through the prayers of the holy Theotokos and of all the saints who have pleased you since time began.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Did you read the quotes from the CCEO?
 
Last edited:
I was responding to a particular user who claimed that differentiation between mortal and venial sins should not be imposed on eastern Catholics.
 
ioannes_pius said:
mortal and venial sin in good conscience, because the Church has consistently made the distinction in her dogmatic definitions.
Click to expand...
And upthread you said:

“I don’t see how any Catholic or whatever rite can deny the distinction between mortal and venial sin in good conscience, because the Church has consistently made the distinction in her dogmatic definitions.”

You still believe that after reading the quotes from the CCEO?
 
Wow, so Eastern Catholics aren’t of good conscience. That is Beyond uncharitable and shows an incredible ignorance of Eastern Catholicism.
 
Last edited:
You said that you don’t understand how someone of good conscience could hold what is taught by the Eastern Catholic Churches, which are communion with Rome, which is fully cognizant of their teaching, and supports them in retaining their theology and practices.

@deniseNY’s synopsis is a fair conclusion.
 
dochawk said:
No. “The Church” has not .
Click to expand...
Really? So when the Ecumenical council of Trent infallibly defined the following:

“If anyone says that in the sacrament of penance it is not required by divine law for the remission of sins to confess each and all mortal sins which are recalled after a due and diligent examination,[79] also secret ones and those that are a violation of the two last commandments of the Decalogue,[80] as also the circumstances that change the nature of a sin, but that this confession is useful only to instruct and console the penitent and in olden times was observed only to impose a canonical satisfaction; or says that they who strive to confess all sins wish to leave nothing to the divine mercy to pardon; or finally, that it is not lawful to confess venial sins, let him be anathema.” (Session XIV, Canon 7, my emphasis)

that that is not “the Church” speaking, but is simply “Latin theology” which easterners are free to reject?
 
ioannes_pius said:
I don’t see how any Catholic or whatever rite can deny the distinction between mortal and venial sin in good conscience, because the Church has consistently made the distinction in her dogmatic definitions.
Click to expand...
Here it is again
 
First, I did not definitively say that Eastern Catholic are not of good conscience. I said that I don’t see how Catholics can completely deny the distinction in good conscience. Second, does the CCEO not make the distinction when it says “serious sin”?
 
ioannes_pius said:
Really? So when the Ecumenical council of Trent infallibly defined the following:
Click to expand...
Please read your history, learn about Eastern Catholics, and the terms of the unions between the churches that entered union with Rome, and what Rome teaches on this.

Until you do so, rather than starting from the latin perspective and seeing things through that sense, we cannot “discuss”, but merely be lectured by you from a position of misunderstanding which rejects papal teaching.

There is no point in further response from either of us here.
 
dochawk said:
There is no point in further response from either of us here.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the Great Lenten Fast…

Not for nothing does the Church prescribe refraining from argumentation and the turning of the nous inward in silence and stillness… We tend as well to expect sickness and other things going wrong in this time… So we fast to give more alms, and pray more to pray more for others, and on and on… This is the great penitential fast, and the forces opposing us greatly desire that we argue with each other…

The EOC tends to do a lot of work on habitual sins, contending with them in confession and labors and penances as indicated… A punitive attitude toward self regarding sin can be a good thing, but a Priest giving a penance is better… Still, 10 prostrations, for instance, for each angry thought, is a very inexpensive way to purchase Grace… Wandering eyes can benefit from the same Px…

We tend to engage our sins in opposition, rather than to determine their venality and not have to deal with them in a robust and self-confrontive manner… We see them as important, and see not confronting them as a greater sin, and especially not confessing them… And just stopping doing the sin is but the first step in that kind of hidden warfare… We are soldiers in battle, and the complete elimination of the enemy is the goal, and this means never even letting the thought of the sin, or even the feeling of the sin, survive its initial onset - And this we call vigilance, and so we keep vigil constantly, and we sin some and lose a lot, but we are engaged at all times, as this defines a Christian Life in our Faith… We make no pretense of sanctity, and any Good we may end up doing is really not our doing, but God’s, as we are but sinners struggling against sinning…

Different phronema, you see…

geo
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
There is certainly recognition in the East that certain sins need to be confessed before you receive Communion
Click to expand...
Thanks for this important point. While not sharing the terminology or detailed theology, there is, in the East, a class of sin that it thought to require confession before receiving communion. I suspect that, operationally, this is what people who use the term mortal sin, mean by that term.
Phillip_Rolfes said:
From what I’ve found, in the East the primary sin that removes one from Communion is apostasy.
Click to expand...
I had thought that at the time of the fathers, a period of excommunication was applied as a canonical penance for many sins. Certainly in the case of remarriage after divorce, killing - even in war, …
David_Catholic said:
We don’t accept Latin terms and theology. It’s as simple as that.
Click to expand...
I think it is better to say that we don’t adopt Latin terminology in the expression of our own theology.
The idea that is is not “accepted” may convey the wrong idea. The idea of mortal sin cannot said to be rejected, because we do acknowledge sin unto death, we appreciate different degrees of gravity, and we do understand that some sins need to be confessed before communing.
 
Last edited:
While Bojan is not Catholic he made a Youtube presentation in which he pretty much demonstrated that there is a distinction in the East between mortal and venial sins. It may be less formal but it is still there.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top