Catholic/Orthodox valid/illicit?

[recentrevert]

From Unitatis redintegratio:

The Eastern Churches in Communion with Rome have the power to govern themselves, under the Pope, in a similar way to the way different states have the power to govern themselves in America according to the principle of subsidiarity. However, the Eastern Orthodox, while separated from Rome ( i.e. from the Church herself), have no spiritual authority at all. They do not have some separate authority granted to them directly by God, apart from the Church, such as parents and the government have temporal authority.

 

[RyanBlack]

The Eastern Churches in Communion with Rome have the power to govern themselves, under the Pope, in a similar way to the way different states have the power to govern themselves in America according to the principle of subsidiarity. However, the Eastern Orthodox, while separated from Rome ( i.e. from the Church herself), have no spiritual authority at all. They do not have some separate authority granted to them directly by God, apart from the Church, such as parents and the government have temporal authority.

What you are saying is in opposition to what Unitatis redintegratio states. The portion I have quoted refers to the Eastern Churches not in full communion with Rome, rather than to the Eastern Catholic Churches.

 

[Wandile]

The CCC (1399) and chapter III of Unitatis redintegratio provide ample refutation of any notion of Orthodox Divine Liturgies as being illicit.

They don’t. Not a single shred. They only speak about validity

 

[SyroMalankara]

The Eastern Churches in Communion with Rome have the power to govern themselves, under the Pope, in a similar way to the way different states have the power to govern themselves in America according to the principle of subsidiarity. However, the Eastern Orthodox, while separated from Rome ( i.e. from the Church herself), have no spiritual authority at all. They do not have some separate authority granted to them directly by God, apart from the Church, such as parents and the government have temporal authority.

I disagree. The Eastern, Oriental and Assyrian Churches not in Communion with Rome have authority granted to govern, through Christ and the Apostles. Ideally, full communion would be best as all would be fully united, however, barring this, the authority to govern their own people flows from their Apostolic Succession and preservation of the orthodox faith and worship. From the Catholic perspective, the only thing separating the Orthodox Churches from full Communion, is full Communion.

The authority of Eastern Catholic Churches to govern does not flow from the Pope, it flows from their direct link to the Apostles and Christ. The union with the Pope fulfills Christ’s desire that “all be One”, and is a sign of Catholicity.

 

[RyanBlack]

They don’t. Not a single shred. They only speak about validity

Just because they don’t use the specific word “licit” doesn’t mean they have nothing to say about licity. What Unitatis redintegratio does explicitly state is that the Orthodox “have the have the power to govern themselves according to the disciplines proper to them.” The administration of sacraments is included in such governance.

 

[Wandile]

I disagree. The Eastern, Oriental and Assyrian Churches not in Communion with Rome have authority granted to govern, through Christ and the Apostles. Ideally, full communion would be best as all would be fully united, however, barring this, the authority to govern their own people flows from their Apostolic Succession and preservation of the orthodox faith and worship. From the Catholic perspective, the only thing separating the Orthodox Churches from full Communion, is full Communion.

The authority of Eastern Catholic Churches to govern does not flow from the Pope, it flows from their direct link to the Apostles and Christ. The union with the Pope fulfills Christ’s desire that “all be One”, and is a sign of Catholicity.

As much as I like you and your posts, in this one instance, the tradition and canons of the church disagree with you.

 

[Wandile]

Just because they don’t use the specific word “licit” doesn’t mean they have nothing to say about licity. What Unitatis redintegratio does explicitly state is that the Orthodox “have the have the power to govern themselves according to the disciplines proper to them.” The administration of sacraments is included in such governance.

Yes that is a statement concerning governing each church according to their tradition. Not the granting of authority. It is rather the right to administer granted authority according to their custom.

Further, that paragraph of Chapter III of Unitatis redintegratio , like I told you in the other thread, speaks to the unity of the church and eastern Catholics in particular. The unity of the church concerns those who are in it. Paragraph 16 is talking about eastern Catholics. The wider chapter is speaking about eastern churches as a whole both Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics. Each sub-paragraph addresses one or the other or both. Paragraph15 for example speaks about the Eastern Orthodox… Para 16 is about eastern Churches within the catholic church and states affirmatively their right to govern according to custom without this causing any scandal to the unity of the church.

 

[RyanBlack]

Yes that is a statement concerning governing each church according to their tradition. Not the granting of authority. It is rather the right to administer granted authority according to their custom.

Further, that paragraph of Chapter III of Unitatis redintegratio , like I told you in the other thread, speaks to the unity of the church and eastern Catholics in particular. The unity of the church concerns those who are in it. Paragraph 16 is talking about eastern Catholics. The wider chapter is speaking about eastern churches as a whole both Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics. Each sub-paragraph addresses one or the other or both. Paragraph15 for example speaks about the Eastern Orthodox… Para 16 is about eastern Churches within the catholic church and states affirmatively their right to govern according to custom without this causing any scandal to the unity of the church.

The entire section is dealing with Church not in full communion with Rome.

 

[prodromos]

However, the Eastern Orthodox, while separated from Rome ( i.e. from the Church herself), have no spiritual authority at all. They do not have some separate authority granted to them directly by God, apart from the Church, such as parents and the government have temporal authority.

God doesn’t seem to be aware of this, given the super abundant outpouring of His Grace during the Divine Liturgy celebrated in the Orthodox Church. See if you can get hold of a copy of “Experiences During The Divine Liturgy” then see if you can rationalise the chasm between your claims and the reality of the situation

 

[Wandile]

God doesn’t seem to be aware of this, given the super abundant outpouring of His Grace during the Divine Liturgy celebrated in the Orthodox Church. See if you can get hold of a copy of “Experiences During The Divine Liturgy” then see if you can rationalise the chasm between your claims and the reality of the situation

Its called non-culpability or being in a position materially. What he speaks of is the objective truth concerning a formal (not material) schismatic. That is how it is explained. Its not that complicated honestly.

 

[Wandile]

The entire section is dealing with Church not in full communion with Rome.

Merely stating it doesn’t make so, no matter how many times you say it.

This understanding of yours does no justice nor conform to the sense of the text. Unity of the of the Church (spoken of in paragraph 16) can only concern those within the Church. The only eastern churches within the Church are the Eastern Catholics. This decree was meant to ease Eastern Orthodox concerns, of Latin destruction of eastern tradition upon reunion, by formally declaring that the easterners in the Church can govern according to their custom. This is how that statement is ecumenical.

 

[prodromos]

Its called non-culpability or being in a position materially. What he speaks of is the objective truth concerning a formal (not material) schismatic. That is how it is explained. Its not that complicated honestly.

Yes of course the Catholic Church would have to come up with something to explain why we poor misguided schismatics enjoy such an abundant outpouring of God’s Grace. Its not that honest complicatedly.

 

[Reuben_J]

How is that this thread which deals exclusively on Catholic practice should be in a non-Catholic religion? And unnecessarily involve and bore the Orthodox.

 

[Wandile]

Yes of course the Catholic Church would have to come up with something to explain why we poor misguided schismatics enjoy such an abundant outpouring of God’s Grace. Its not that honest complicatedly.

You do know this reading was not made up after the schism. It is taught in tradition. The Saints from all talk about the objective truth of the situation schismatics are in. Subjectively it’s more iffy because some people are only inherit schism and are not culpable for it hence they are in some way united to the Catholic Church and thus enjoy the fruits/graces of the sacraments. This is basic theology. Its not just against the EO but all schismatics…