D
divinefaith
Guest
Do the Church teachings about morality cover even the Eastern Catholic sects, or are they individually formed by individual patriarchs\Bishops?
- Status
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
It is Eastern Catholic Churches.
They are Catholic, they hold to Catholic teachings.
M
MrPip
Guest
Indeed! The Church teachings on morality apply to ALL Catholics.
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
The basic morality is the same. It is worth pointing out, however, that Eastern Catholics (at least the Melkites) do not make the distinction between mortal and venial sin.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
From an Eastern standpoint, morality is not Christian…
(this is a very good read
)
fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2011/09/09/why-morality-is-not-christian/
(this is a very good read
)fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2011/09/09/why-morality-is-not-christian/
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I am sorry but I have to say this.From an Eastern standpoint, morality is not Christian…
(this is a very good read
fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2011/09/09/why-morality-is-not-christian/
When answering a question about Eastern Catholicism I think it is very important that we use Catholic sources. Posting a link to a blog of an Orthodox priest does not provide an Eastern Catholic answer. Sometimes it may help with tradition and such but it will not provide insight into Catholic Teachings in most cases.
At the very least you should provide a “warning” that the blog linked is not a Catholic source.
D
divinefaith
Guest
wouldn’t that teaching of mortal\venial sins be a universal teaching?
D
divinefaith
Guest
It confuses me that Eastern Churches have their own rules on fasting and their own set of days which are considered Holy Days of Obligation.
T
The_Idiot
Guest
Doe it also confuse you that they have their own form of Eucharistic Service - known as the Divine Liturgy of Our Father among the Saints, John Chrysostom ?
P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
Not necessarily. From what I’ve read it’s actually even a fairly recent teaching within the Roman Church. I wish I could remember where I read it, but supposedly the Jesuits developed the concept of mortal/venial sin when they began developing their lists of sins for “examination of conscience” pamphlets. If this is true, then the Roman Church itself has not always had a concept of mortal/venial sin.
It also has to do with different approaches and emphases on the faith. The article Constantine cited is very much worth reading.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
We’re building a library for our eparchy and over half of the books we’re ordering are from Orthodox sources. I haven’t heard of a plan on posting a warning sign on our library.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
No. Its part and parcel of the entire theology which East and West do not share.
M
mardukm
Guest
Dear brother ConstantineTG,
I read the link you gave. It contrasts Eastern Orthodox theology with Anglican/Catholic theology. It has a lot of good points to offer, as brother Phillip Rolfes points out, but it miserably fails in its premise.
The article opposes the concept of “moral” and “ontological,” claiming the former to be “Western” and the latter to be “Eastern.” There’s the problem – for if the writer knew anything about Western CATHOLIC thought on the matter, he would have known that his statement on the “Eastern” view is shared by the Western CATHOLIC Church. In fact, this was one of the main points of disagreement between the Western CATHOLIC Church and the western PROTESTANT Church - the issue of mere imputed righteousness (Protestant position) versus infused righteousness (Catholic position).
The problem with the Eastern Orthodox preoccupation with trying to distinguish between “Eastern” and “Western” is that it constantly fails to distinguish between Western CATHOLIC theology from Western PROTESTANT theology. That is why you should not and cannot immediately trust EO sources when such sources claim to be able to make a distinction between “Eastern” and “Western.”
You need to have more discerning persons who are building a library of theological sources for your local Church. I might have suggested that you, having been Latin Catholic, could help in the discernment process, but it seems your desire and excitement to learn about the East is overriding anything you had learned as a Latin Catholic. And perhaps you are accepting EO claims much too readily and broadly without really discerning what these EO sources are saying.
Blessings,
Marduk
It is dangerous to depend on Eastern Orthodox sources because Eastern Orthodox sources misrepresent the Catholic Faith.
I read the link you gave. It contrasts Eastern Orthodox theology with Anglican/Catholic theology. It has a lot of good points to offer, as brother Phillip Rolfes points out, but it miserably fails in its premise.
The article opposes the concept of “moral” and “ontological,” claiming the former to be “Western” and the latter to be “Eastern.” There’s the problem – for if the writer knew anything about Western CATHOLIC thought on the matter, he would have known that his statement on the “Eastern” view is shared by the Western CATHOLIC Church. In fact, this was one of the main points of disagreement between the Western CATHOLIC Church and the western PROTESTANT Church - the issue of mere imputed righteousness (Protestant position) versus infused righteousness (Catholic position).
The problem with the Eastern Orthodox preoccupation with trying to distinguish between “Eastern” and “Western” is that it constantly fails to distinguish between Western CATHOLIC theology from Western PROTESTANT theology. That is why you should not and cannot immediately trust EO sources when such sources claim to be able to make a distinction between “Eastern” and “Western.”
You need to have more discerning persons who are building a library of theological sources for your local Church. I might have suggested that you, having been Latin Catholic, could help in the discernment process, but it seems your desire and excitement to learn about the East is overriding anything you had learned as a Latin Catholic. And perhaps you are accepting EO claims much too readily and broadly without really discerning what these EO sources are saying.
Blessings,
Marduk
M
mardukm
Guest
Please suggest to them that they need to.
Might I suggest: “WARNING: THIS ARTICLE/SOURCE DOES NOT PROPERLY DISTINGUISH WESTERN CATHOLIC THEOLOGY FROM WESTERN PROTESTANT THEOLOGY.”
Blessings,
Marduk
M
mardukm
Guest
Does it confuse you to find out that even within the Latin Catholic Church, different countries keep different feast days for local Saints? These are LOCAL “holy days of obligation” that are not kept by all local Churches within Latin Catholicism.
Blessings,
Marduk
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
I think the obvious answer here is we don’t get Orthodox books to learn about Western theology or spirituality.
M
mardukm
Guest
Are you saying that an inherent part of your catechism as an Eastern Catholic is to accept falsehoods about our Latin brethren in the Catholic Church?
Are you saying that Eastern Byzantine Catholic catechesis permits you to neglect the Scriptural exhortations about correct discernment?
Perhaps as a catechumen in your local parish, you feel you really don’t have a say in the matter. If so, could I please have an e-mail link to your parish (if there is one), or eparchy? I would like to contact your authorities about this matter. It is important that in search of the Truth, one does not give in to falsehoods at the same time.
Blessings,
Marduk
D
divinefaith
Guest
Some of you posters seem to be saying that Eastern Catholics ignore a teaching of Catholic theology which defines both mortal and venial sins. If its true the Eastern Church doesn’t believe this, then won’t it mean it’s holding the Protestant belief of no classifications of sin?
Correct me if I’m wrong guys.
Correct me if I’m wrong guys.
R
RyanBlack
Guest
No. The Eastern tradition of not seeing sin in terms of mortal vs. venial predates Protestantism.
M
mardukm
Guest
Can you please provide for us the document where the Catholic Church has dogmatically defined the distinction between mortal and venial sin?
I propose you will not find any. What you will find are sources quoting individual sayings of Saints such as St. Augustine or St. Thomas Aquinas. What you will not find is a solid definition. In fact, the notion that some sins considered “venial” can indeed become “mortal” demonstrates that the distinction is not at all capable of definition.
At best, what we have is a dogmatic statement from Trent of the necessity of confessing mortal sins.
Thus, I seriously doubt anyone can say with confidence that the distinction itself is a universal teaching.
Blessings,
Marduk
- Status