Confused with EO saints?

[Bballer32]

Hello again everyone!

Can someone explain to me how the Eastern Orthodox declare saints and which churches, if not all, can venerate them?

For example, Amphilochius of Pochayiv is considered a saint in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Does this mean that only Ukrainian Orthodox can venerate him? and how did he become a saint if he is only honored in that Church? Don’t all the EO churches have to agree on who can be declared a saint or not?

Thanks

 

[Aelred_Minor]

The Orthodox Church is not exactly set up for such universal canonizations.

 

[runningdude]

Anyone is free to venerate anyone individual believed to have lived a holy life. Public veneration is only permitted on a church by church basis.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Hello again everyone!

Can someone explain to me how the Eastern Orthodox declare saints and which churches, if not all, can venerate them?

For example, Amphilochius of Pochayiv is considered a saint in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Does this mean that only Ukrainian Orthodox can venerate him? and how did he become a saint if he is only honored in that Church? Don’t all the EO churches have to agree on who can be declared a saint or not?

When a saint is glorified, it means that he (or she) has been added onto the calendar of some synod, for his name to be read out during the reading of the synaxarion on the day he is commemorated. It also opens up the possibility that hymns can be composed for the saint, and that parishes might be dedicated to him. That does not mean that the veneration of this saint would be limited only to the geographical region of that synod, but rather that the saint would not have a dedicated feast day in other regions until the synods there decided to add him to their calendar. However, this stuff normally spreads pretty fast, because hagiographies and stories of saints are rather popular, so once somebody gets canonized in one geographical area, it’s almost inevitable that his veneration will spread to others. The process is so fast, that some people even have reputations which spread before any ecclesiastical body has canonized them. This is the case with Fr. Seraphim (Rose) of Platina (in California), whose biography, I am told, is available in many church bookstores throughout Greece, despite the fact that nobody has canonized him.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Anyone is free to venerate anyone individual believed to have lived a holy life. Public veneration is only permitted on a church by church basis.

That is correct, and there is often a link between the two. Somebody who led a righteous life and is venerated by many individually will often then be investigated, and if found truly to have lived a holy life, be declared a saint and added to the liturgical calendar.

 

[Nine_Two]

. However, this stuff normally spreads pretty fast, because hagiographies and stories of saints are rather popular, so once somebody gets canonized in one geographical area, it’s almost inevitable that his veneration will spread to others.

As evidenced by my icon of a German passion-bearer who was canonized by ROCOR just last year, which I purchased through my OCA parish.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

I tell my Protestant and atheist friends that the Saints belong to the entire world, they cannot be confined to a single group. The Saints have guided many atheists to the faith.

 

[Bataar]

I’ve always wondered why the Roman Rite church doesn’t (publicly?) honor or even acknowledge the saints of the eastern church. At least the ones where were before the great schism. You never hear mention of Saints John Chrysostom, Basil the Great or even Nicholas.

 

[JMJ_coder]

I’ve always wondered why the Roman Rite church doesn’t (publicly?) honor or even acknowledge the saints of the eastern church. At least the ones where were before the great schism. You never hear mention of Saints John Chrysostom, Basil the Great or even Nicholas.

Yes they are. Here is information on the current liturgical calendar in use for the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church for the Saints you mentioned: the Memorial of Sts. Basil and Gregory Nazianzen is January 2, the Memorial of Saint John Chrysostom is on September 13, and the Optional Memorial of Saint Nicholas is on December 6.

 

[neokarny]

Isn’t the EC practice effectively the same as the EO, minus the fact that they get the Pope to confirm the saint’s glorification?

Either way, the EC seem to have saints on their calendars that aren’t on the Latin calendars (St. Gregory Palamas I believe is one, and probably St. Severus of Antioch for some of the non-Chalcedonian Catholics), which amounts to the same effect of this thread. A Latin could - or at least should, IMO - be able to venerate an EC saint without issue, AFAIK.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Isn’t the EC practice effectively the same as the EO, minus the fact that they get the Pope to confirm the saint’s glorification?

Either way, the EC seem to have saints on their calendars that aren’t on the Latin calendars (St. Gregory Palamas I believe is one, and probably St. Severus of Antioch for some of the non-Chalcedonian Catholics), which amounts to the same effect of this thread. A Latin could - or at least should, IMO - be able to venerate an EC saint without issue, AFAIK.

I believe that for any modern Saint to be proclaimed in an Eastern Catholic Church, the same canonization procedure would be required.

But, you are correct that a Saint in one Catholic Church is a Saint in every Catholic Church.

 

[neokarny]

I believe that for any modern Saint to be proclaimed in an Eastern Catholic Church, the same canonization procedure would be required.

But, you are correct that a Saint in one Catholic Church is a Saint in every Catholic Church.

I’m just confused by what you meant - the same procedure as what? The Latin Church?

 

[JMJ_coder]

I’m just confused by what you meant - the same procedure as what? The Latin Church?

Yes. Now, I’m not 100% positive on that at this moment, but I do think that is correct.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Just for note, here is a link to the general procedure for canonization in the Catholic Church - ewtn.com/johnpaul2/cause/process.asp

 

[neokarny]

Just for note, here is a link to the general procedure for canonization in the Catholic Church - ewtn.com/johnpaul2/cause/process.asp

Thanks for this. I often forget the Latins approach the glorification process in divisions.

If your previous comment is correct and the EC’s do abide by this process, I don’t see how it’s fair to the Eastern traditions which don’t necessitate miracles (much less with rigorous examination), divide up glorification into stages or levels, etc.

 

[JMJ_coder]

If your previous comment is correct and the EC’s do abide by this process, I don’t see how it’s fair to the Eastern traditions which don’t necessitate miracles (much less with rigorous examination), divide up glorification into stages or levels, etc.

I don’t know how fair or unfair it is. I don’t really think it is an undue burden, anymore than it was when the Latin Church began the Congregation era.

As for the ‘stages’, a lot of it has to to with the universality of the feast day. For example, when one is beatified then they can be venerated liturgically (e.g., at Mass or in the Divine Office), but only locally (i.e., their own diocese or religious order). Canonization applies this liturgical veneration to the universal calendar.

 

[neokarny]

I don’t know how fair or unfair it is. I don’t really think it is an undue burden, anymore than it was when the Latin Church began the Congregation era.

I’m not sure what you mean by “Congregation era.” I’m biased in favor of Churches abiding by their own traditional norms, but I’m just an outsider in either case.

As for the ‘stages’, a lot of it has to to with the universality of the feast day. For example, when one is beatified then they can be venerated liturgically (e.g., at Mass or in the Divine Office), but only locally (i.e., their own diocese or religious order). Canonization applies this liturgical veneration to the universal calendar.

Universal calendar? I didn’t realize there was such a thing in the RCC, as the EC’s AFAIK tend to have fairly different calendars from the RC’s (e.g. no Corpus Christi outside Latinized churches, etc.).

Anyway, it’s interesting how it differs from the Orthodox process(es).

OCA’s website gives this brief description of their process:

Long before an official inquiry into a person’s life is made, that person is venerated by the people where he or she lived and died. His or her memory is kept alive by the people who pray for his or her soul or who ask him or her for intercession. Sometimes people will visit his or her grave or have icons painted through their love for the person. Then a request is made, usually through the diocesan bishop, for the Church to recognize that person as a saint. A committee, such as the Orthodox Church in America’s Canonization Commission, is formed to research the life of the person who is being considered for glorification and to submit a report to the Holy Synod stating its reasons why the person should or should not be recognized as a saint. Then the Holy Synod decides to number that person among the saints and have icons painted and liturgical services composed.

The formal Rite of Glorification begins with a final Memorial Service for the person about to be canonized, after which Vespers and Matins with special hymns to the saint are chanted and the saint’s icon is unveiled. The saint’s life is published and the date of his or her commemoration is established. The other Orthodox Churches are notified of the glorification so that they can place the new saint’s name on their calendars.

I’ve also heard that there can be local, diocesan glorification of a saint, although I’m not sure how this works. I just know there are saints glorified locally that have churches built in their honor, icons of them used in churches, and their names even commemorated - all without being glorified by a Synod. This very well may be an illegitimate practice, IDK.

 

[JMJ_coder]

I’m not sure what you mean by “Congregation era.” I’m biased in favor of Churches abiding by their own traditional norms, but I’m just an outsider in either case.

‘Congregation era’ is a word I semi made up to describe the time that the canonization process was consolidated in Rome. Hence before you have pre-Congregation Saints (and yes, that one is a real word). The reason for the shift to Rome was a little gradual and it had some good reasons - for example, to guarantee the holiness and sanctity of a person by a rigorous examination of their life that may be overlooked by popular acclaim.

Universal calendar? I didn’t realize there was such a thing in the RCC, as the EC’s AFAIK tend to have fairly different calendars from the RC’s (e.g. no Corpus Christi outside Latinized churches, etc.).

Yes, there is a universal calendar in the Catholic Church. What is means is that if a Saint is on that calendar then he/she may be liturgically venerated anywhere in the world, as opposed to a local calendar that only applies to a diocese or religious order. It doesn’t necessarily imply that the same date is used throughout all the Catholic Churches, though. For example, Saint Charbel Makhluf, a Maronite Saint who was canonized by Pope Paul IV in the 70’s has a feast day of July 23 in the Maronite Calendar but July 24 on the Roman Calendar. Some of this just happens to be logistics - there are only 365 days in the year and thousands of Saints.