Do Eastern Catholics Believe in Mortal and Venial Sin?

[ConstantineTG]

I would love to read it in English. Because if any of the De Fide teaching is at odds, then the Latin Church should not be expected to assent to De Fide teaching on pain of sin.

You won’t find anything conflicting. Only jmj asserts that there is a conflict. The Church herself doesn’t think so. Blessed Pope John Paul II has stated in Orientale Lumen that one tradition (East or West) can explain matters of the faith more clearly than the other, that is why there must be an agreement and co-dependence between East and West because only then will the true catholicity of our Church will be realized.

What is the point of communion? Is it just a peace treaty?

It means that we agree on our beliefs, and we share the Eucharist among our Churches because we know that we are all followers of the true Christ.

 

[TrueLight]

Excuse me, but I believe it is this bickering of Westerners that Eastern Catholics aren’t Catholic which causes the most pain with Christ. We are brothers and sisters, are brothers and sisters different yes, are they one family yes, so they have separate beliefs but they are one. A good analogy about the Church are the Four Gospels. If some of you Roman Catholics believe we only need 1 expression of theology and spirituality then why do we have 4 Gospels. The point? Each Gospel is written for a different audience, culture, and location. Just as the four Evangelists do not contradict each other, the Eastern, Oriental, and Western Churches don’t either. If you want another less religious example, take the hand. When you make a fist what do you have? One fist. But what makes up that fist? Five separate fingers which aren’t exactly alike and can perform functions in various capacities. No finger is less a finger than the other, and when they all come together they are one fist. Therefore you have 5 different ways to be a finger, which all come together as 1 fist, and they are all rooted in one hand. Enough with this, “It is De Fide you must believe” we aren’t denying it, but it isn’t part of our patrimony. How would you like it if we imposed the Eastern fasting regulations, or the concept of energies, essence, and theoria upon you? You don’t ascribe to toll houses, heck that concept is dominant really in the Russian Orthodox Church, do the Russians say that the Greek Orthodox are heretics for not believing in it? NO. How about iconography, all Westerners should have Byzantine iconography. This wouldn’t be acceptable in the West now would it? So quit, arguing and starting learning about the East. I shall give you some advice, you can’t learn and truly understand Eastern theology and spirituality without taking yourself out of the Western mentality. Come at it with a tabula rasa, you must see how the East lives it. Also jmj the Eastern Divine Liturgy teaches much of the theology and spirituality, so technically it is an authority within the church. That is why it has not been changed since the 1st millenia.

I don’t know if anyone said Eastern Catholics were not Catholic. The point is if something is De Fide teaching, than it should be for all Catholics. If it is not, then one is free to be more attracted to Western or Eastern theology or mix it up, like I’m going to mix up prayer ropes with rosaries.

However, one can’t diminish the office of the Pope or have a different viewpoint of the dogma of original sin. Assuming it is a Dogma. If original sin is open to different interpretations, then Latin Catholics should not be bound to stick to the Western interpretation of it either.

It’s just like the Church says we are free to believe in the Dormition or the Assumption. Fine. However, if we are obligated to believe in something, Eastern Catholics should not be bound to believe something else.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Seeing as you cant marshal any authorities to support your point of view, I’m afraid you’re the one who’s been rambling.

Believe what you want, I’m confident in what I believe in and what I have been taught in the Eastern Faith. I don’t need to do a quote-a-thon like I’m some Protestant sola scripturist. Anyone can quote something and make it whatever they want to be. My proof really is how the Churches are actually running and functioning today, possessing different traditions of the same faith, living in harmony. Like I said, the Pope is not calling the East out for having a different praxis. He in fact is encouraging the East to be more faithful and live a more authentic Eastern praxis to promote unity with the Orthodox. I don’t think an anonymous lay person on an internet message board can trump that.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I would be VERY surprised if those who originally came into The Catholic Church and those that received them used the same arguments and language as some Eastern Catholics do these days. It goes back to my point about what ‘genuine traditions’ are, clearly they cannot contradict De Fide teaching.

There you go again. Do you even know what contradict means? It seems that for you it has to be word-for-word the same, otherwise they cannot be contradictory. Two things doesn’t have to be 100% the same exact thing to be non-contradictory. Not just because the theology is different means they are contradictory. The Pope has said as much, the Church has said as much, why can’t you get it? Our theology is different, but its not contradictory.

 

[jmj1984]

There you go again. Do you even know what contradict means? It seems that for you it has to be word-for-word the same, otherwise they cannot be contradictory. Two things doesn’t have to be 100% the same exact thing to be non-contradictory. Not just because the theology is different means they are contradictory. The Pope has said as much, the Church has said as much, why can’t you get it? Our theology is different, but its not contradictory.

There is no point continuing the discussion you will not and indeed cannot defend your beliefs and instead continue to make unsubstantiated statements. No one’s talking about different theology I explicitly said only contradictory theology, certain views on this forum about the role of the pope and original sin do contradict the official De Fide teachings. As for the Pope saying this, the church saying this, I dont get it because you can’t show where its been said.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I don’t know if anyone said Eastern Catholics were not Catholic. The point is if something is De Fide teaching, than it should be for all Catholics. If it is not, then one is free to be more attracted to Western or Eastern theology or mix it up, like I’m going to mix up prayer ropes with rosaries.

I wouldn’t advice it. It will make one a bit schizophrenic spiritually. The emphasis of each praxis is different, it will confuse most people if not properly catechized from the ground up on each one.

However, one can’t diminish the office of the Pope or have a different viewpoint of the dogma of original sin. Assuming it is a Dogma. If original sin is open to different interpretations, then Latin Catholics should not be bound to stick to the Western interpretation of it either.

Thats not quite right. Because original sin came out of Western theology, those who follow Western traditions are bound to it. Actually if you strip down what is “de fide” in original sin, you’ll find that there isn’t really much difference with what the East and West believes in.

It’s just like the Church says we are free to believe in the Dormition or the Assumption. Fine. However, if we are obligated to believe in something, Eastern Catholics should not be bound to believe something else.

And who says we believe in something else?

 

[ConstantineTG]

There is no point continuing the discussion you will not and indeed cannot defend your beliefs and instead continue to make unsubstantiated statements. No one’s talking about different theology I explicitly said only contradictory theology, certain views on this forum about the role of the pope and original sin do contradict the official De Fide teachings. As for the Pope saying this, the church saying this, I dont get it because you can’t show where its been said.

I keep repeating, there is no contradiction. So what is the problem here? Even if our theology is expressed differently, there is no contradiction to Western belief. So what’s the problem?

 

[TrueLight]

I wouldn’t advice it. It will make one a bit schizophrenic spiritually. The emphasis of each praxis is different, it will confuse most people if not properly catechized from the ground up on each one.

Don’t worry. I can handle it.

I’m not speaking of mixing up everything. But something like the Art of Prayer or saying the Jesus prayer won’t be a problem.

 

[jmj1984]

Believe what you want, I’m confident in what I believe in and what I have been taught in the Eastern Faith. I don’t need to do a quote-a-thon like I’m some Protestant sola scripturist. Anyone can quote something and make it whatever they want to be. My proof really is how the Churches are actually running and functioning today, possessing different traditions of the same faith, living in harmony. Like I said, the Pope is not calling the East out for having a different praxis. He in fact is encouraging the East to be more faithful and live a more authentic Eastern praxis to promote unity with the Orthodox. I don’t think an anonymous lay person on an internet message board can trump that.

Not sure what the point of this post was

By these standards whenever the Pope doesnt condemn something the laity should just be quiet and say nothing, this position is patently absurd for several reasons:

1)There have been numerous abuses or mistaken theological positions over the years which it has taken The Holy See decades to explicitly condemn, your view would have lay catholics say nothing about this even if they can see these views are erroneous
2)The Holy see HAS dealt with this matter through its catechism and statements from the CDF
3)Theologians such as Cardinal Ratzinger have also dealt with this matter

If you want to have a different position have a different position, I am not here as an apologist, just don’t pretend The Church approves it when it clearly doesn’t. And yet again you fail to substantitate your claims meaning that whilst I am merely passing on what I have received you are merely sounding off your opinion.

 

[jmj1984]

I keep repeating, there is no contradiction. So what is the problem here? Even if our theology is expressed differently, there is no contradiction to Western belief. So what’s the problem?

Lets be clear:

1. Assigning the pope merely a primacy of honour or saying he should only have authority when called upon by others to act is not ‘a different expression’, its simply wrong
   2)Saying that original sin is merely death or a result of death is likewise wrong

 

[ConstantineTG]

Lets be clear:

1. Assigning the pope merely a primacy of honour or saying he should only have authority when called upon by others to act is not ‘a different expression’, its simply wrong
   2)Saying that original sin is merely death or a result of death is likewise wrong

Now you’re putting words into my mouth. When did I ever assign him primacy of honor only?

And when did I say that original sin is merely death?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Not sure what the point of this post was

By these standards whenever the Pope doesnt condemn something the laity should just be quiet and say nothing, this position is patently absurd for several reasons:

1)There have been numerous abuses or mistaken theological positions over the years which it has taken The Holy See decades to explicitly condemn, your view would have lay catholics say nothing about this even if they can see these views are erroneous
2)The Holy see HAS dealt with this matter through its catechism and statements from the CDF
3)Theologians such as Cardinal Ratzinger have also dealt with this matter

If you want to have a different position have a different position, I am not here as an apologist, just don’t pretend The Church approves it when it clearly doesn’t. And yet again you fail to substantitate your claims meaning that whilst I am merely passing on what I have received you are merely sounding off your opinion.

The Pope wasn’t quite on the matter, the recent Popes have been actively telling us to live the authentic faith of the East. So its not what you are claiming that it is. We are told to do what we are doing. The Church isn’t just merely quite on the issue.

 

[jmj1984]

Now you’re putting words into my mouth. When did I ever assign him primacy of honor only?

And when did I say that original sin is merely death?

I never said you did, I was talking about others on this thread and forum, thats all. I never said I believed you believed these things merely pointed out that others go too far.

 

[jmj1984]

The Pope wasn’t quite on the matter, the recent Popes have been actively telling us to live the authentic faith of the East. So its not what you are claiming that it is. We are told to do what we are doing. The Church isn’t just merely quite on the issue.

Could you provide some sources where The Church says this? Or where it said you could disagree with De Fide teachings?

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Augustine did not have as much influence on the Christian East as one might hope or wish. The church existed long before he became a Christian, and for good or ill it has little to no influence on Eastern Christian thinking. The Apostolic Eastern Christian Faith is simply not dependent upon Latin constructs.

So which flavor of Prevenient Grace do you prefer, the Calvinist or the Arminian?
.
.

Sorry for being a bit late, I haven’t been on here for a day .

True about the Augustine part. but just because he didn’t influence the East as much as the West doesn’t make it ok to be semi-pelagian. As long as the belief is the same, even expressed differently, it’s ok. IMO, it doesn’t matter if you call it prevenient grace or not, as long as you believe grace precedes human action.

Personally, I like the Congruist model (Jesuits). I don’t think it’s perfect, but it’s the closest view there is to the truth IMHO. I like to try and comprehend things, so I’m not completely satisfied with “it’s all a big mystery”. I know it is, but I still like to know as much as possible. :compcoff::newidea:

 

[ciero]

Boy I’m sure glad my bishop and Rome see things differently then all those pushing an ultra RC position on here!

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Boy I’m sure glad my bishop and Rome see things differently then all those pushing an ultra RC position on here!

Are you referring to me?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Boy I’m sure glad my bishop and Rome see things differently then all those pushing an ultra RC position on here!

Ditto!

 

[ciero]

Are you referring to me?

You and others.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

You and others.

What have I said that has been too RC for you? And technically the whole church is Roman . (I said technically). BTW I’m (shudder) Lutheran right now . So I’m not fully informed.