Eastern Catholics and Dogma

[Billmccallister]

I have been researching both Eastern and Western Catholicism. I have found a list of Roman Catholic dogmas at this site…

theworkofgod.org/dogmas.htm

I would like to know what the Eastern Catholic position is on Roman Catholic dogmas. I understand the approaches are different, but how do the ECs approach the Roman dogmas. Where do their views “differ” on the dogmas listed in the link above? Is there such thing as Byzantine Catholic dogma? If so, where can I find it?

I already understand the ECs view on the “filioque” and the Papacy, so please do not discuss Church “politics”.

Also, this is a thread for Eastern Catholics or people who understand the Eastern Catholic Churches. I do not want Orthodox and Roman Catholic positions. I understand this sounds mean, but anytime I try to find out about the Byzantine Catholic postion on various topics I either get info on the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Churches and that is not what I am looking for. If a Roman Catholic or an Orthodox can give me insight on the Eastern Catholics, please share your information.

One more thing, I did not setup this topic so it can turn into a debate. That is one thing that really irritates me about forums, there are various topics that can be discussed, but it ends up being a 20 page argument on one topic.

Please forgive me if I am coming off as rude, but I have been looking for answers for awhile and I only receive more questions and it is very frustrating.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Little_Boy_Lost]

We believe what Rome, and Alexandria, and Antioch and Jerusalem believe but in our own words and understanding. Otherwise we would not be in communion with the Pope of Rome.

 

[ciero]

We believe what Rome, and Alexandria, and Antioch and Jerusalem believe but in our own words and understanding. Otherwise we would not be in communion with the Pope of Rome.

What about Constantinople?

 

[Little_Boy_Lost]

What about Constantinople?

That’s us = D

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

There really is no such thing as a “Roman Catholic Dogma”. There are Catholic Dogmas as expressed by the Roman Church.

All Catholics have the same Dogmas though we may describe them differently due to our different theological traditions.

 

[sidbrown]

There really is no such thing as a “Roman Catholic Dogma”. There are Catholic Dogmas as expressed by the Roman Church.

All Catholics have the same Dogmas though we may describe them differently due to our different theological traditions.

Do Eastern Catholics believe in papal infallibility, Purgatory, and the filioque?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Do Eastern Catholics believe in papal infallibility, Purgatory, and the filioque?

I think I was pretty clear in my reply.

Eastern Catholics are Catholics and are bound to Catholic Dogmas.

The filioque is not a Dogma.

 

[5Loaves]

Please forgive me if I am coming off as rude, but I have been looking for answers for awhile and I only receive more questions and it is very frustrating.

Peace and God bless!

Welcome to the EC section. I thought your post was very clear in establishing what you seek.

I recommend listening to the excellent interview Catherine Alexander did with Father Abbot Nicholas of Holy Resurrection Romanian Catholic Monastery Eastern Catholic Theology PART 1 and Eastern Catholic Theology PART 2. If you click on the “… (more info)” link you can scroll down and see the exact questions Catherine addresses in each section, in the order she asks them.

I think this interview will give you some direction for what you seek.

 

[sidbrown]

The filioque is not a Dogma.

Oh really?
So you deny that the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to be a dogma of faith in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and at the Second council of Lyons (1274) ?

 

[Little_Boy_Lost]

Oh really?
So you deny that the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to be a dogma of faith in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and at the Second council of Lyons (1274) ?

Saint Maximos the Confessor writes that the latins and the greeks say the same thing regardless of the formula used. Pope Benedict has recited the Nicene Creed without the Filioque from time to time. All the Eastern Churches as far as I know are allowed to use the Nicene Creed in the form before the western church added the Filioque in. BTW, I’m pretty sure Council of Florence allowed the Eastern Churches to keep their creed intact.

papal infallibility, Purgatory

Short answer. Yes.

Long Answer. Treaty of Brest said the Greeks and Latins would not debate about the nature of purgatory. This is a dead issue.

Papal Infallibility is accepted but by different explanations. This does NOT mean the pope has universal jurisdiction or supremacy over other churches beyond his defined role in papal infallibility… which can be understood by John Chrysostom’s image of a Conductor leading a choir. He directs movements and places emphasis on certain movements in the choir, but ultimately he can’t create something from nothing. It is all based on the same music the choir and the conductor share.

The pope only derives his infallibility by being in service to the church. Thus, the pope is the mouth of the church. He only speaks FOR the Church and enunciates what the church already believes.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Oh really?
So you deny that the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to be a dogma of faith in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and at the Second council of Lyons (1274) ?

As Little Boy Lost says.

The Filioque is not a Dogma, at least what you believe the Filioque to be saying is not Dogma.

I wrote a paper on this in my undergrad at a very Catholic University with a very orthodox priest. The misunderstanding with the Filioque goes to the languages used and the meaning of the words used. The Truth is as stated Saint Maximos the Confessor, we are saying the same thing.

 

[sidbrown]

The Filioque is not a Dogma, …

No kidding?
It appears in writing that the Archbishop of NY does not agree. And as well, the Fourth Lateran Council and the Second Council of Lyons::

Canon I of the Fourth Lateran Council 1215:
“We firmly believe and openly confess that there is only one true God, eternal and immense, omnipotent, unchangeable, incomprehensible, and ineffable, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; three Persons indeed but one essense, substance, or nature absolutely simple; the Father (proceeding) from no one, but the Son from the Father only, and the Holy Ghost equally from both, always without beginning and end.”
Constitution II of the Second Council of Lyons 1274:
“We profess faithfully and devotedly that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle; not by two spirations, but by one single spiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mistress of all the faithful, has till now professed, preached and taught; this she firmly holds, preaches, professes and teaches; this is the unchangeable and true belief of the orthodox fathers and doctors, Latin and Greek alike. But because some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth, have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son,….”
Catholic Encyclopedia:
“The dogma of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father and Son as one Principle is directly opposed to the error that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, not from the Son……**the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to be a dogma of faith **in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the Second council of Lyons (1274), and the Council of Florence (1438-1445).”
Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. September 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.

 

[ciero]

No kidding?
It appears in writing that the Archbishop of NY does not agree. And as well, the Fourth Lateran Council and the Second Council of Lyons::

Canon I of the Fourth Lateran Council 1215:
“We firmly believe and openly confess that there is only one true God, eternal and immense, omnipotent, unchangeable, incomprehensible, and ineffable, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; three Persons indeed but one essense, substance, or nature absolutely simple; the Father (proceeding) from no one, but the Son from the Father only, and the Holy Ghost equally from both, always without beginning and end.”
Constitution II of the Second Council of Lyons 1274:
“We profess faithfully and devotedly that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle; not by two spirations, but by one single spiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mistress of all the faithful, has till now professed, preached and taught; this she firmly holds, preaches, professes and teaches; this is the unchangeable and true belief of the orthodox fathers and doctors, Latin and Greek alike. But because some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth, have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son,….”
Catholic Encyclopedia:
“The dogma of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father and Son as one Principle is directly opposed to the error that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, not from the Son……**the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to be a dogma of faith **in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the Second council of Lyons (1274), and the Council of Florence (1438-1445).”
Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. September 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.

You Latins just want us Easterners out of the church…right? Or to become good Roman Catholics…right?

 

[coconutty]

Well, I know Eastern Orthodox peeps (for lack of a better word!) don’t believe in original sin, and therefore deny the dogma of the Immaculate Conception because they believe the Theotokos (Mary) did not to have sin removed miraculously.
Even though this is not really on topic, I have heard that certain Eastern rites drink Holy Water instead of just blessing themselves the way Roman Catholics do.
Hope this helps!​

Ora pro nobis, Nostrum Eternus Era!
http://happyheart(name removed by moderator).typepad.com/sweetness_and_light/images/2008/05/30/immaculate_heart_2.jpg

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

No kidding?
It appears in writing that the Archbishop of NY does not agree. And as well, the Fourth Lateran Council and the Second Council of Lyons::

When responding to my reply please read my whole reply and respond to the whole thing.

Here it is for you again as you seem to have not read it.

As Little Boy Lost says.

The Filioque is not a Dogma, at least what you believe the Filioque to be saying is not Dogma.

I wrote a paper on this in my undergrad at a very Catholic University with a very orthodox priest. The misunderstanding with the Filioque goes to the languages used and the meaning of the words used. The Truth is as stated Saint Maximos the Confessor, we are saying the same thing.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Well, I know Eastern Orthodox peeps (for lack of a better word!) don’t believe in original sin, and therefore deny the dogma of the Immaculate Conception because they believe the Theotokos (Mary) did not to have sin removed miraculously.

You are wrong here. The Orthodox and Eastern Catholics do believe in Original Sin, it is the issue of the Stain of Original Sin (I believe its the Augustinian view of it) that is in question.

I know Orthodox who do believe in the Immaculate Conception. Its just not seen as a Dogma so it is not a required belief as it is for Catholics.

 

[JackQ]

You Latins just want us Easterners out of the church…right? Or to become good Roman Catholics…right?

I’m a Latin Catholic, and I most definitely do NOT want you out of the Church. I think those who criticize the way the Eastern Catholics approach our religion are no more than a vocal, but extremely small minority.

Having said that, what do the Eastern Catholics do with the Council of Florence and its declaration that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son?

 

[Hesychios]

You are wrong here. The Orthodox and Eastern Catholics do believe in Original Sin, it is the issue of the Stain of Original Sin (I believe its the Augustinian view of it) that is in question.

I know Orthodox who do believe in the Immaculate Conception. Its just not seen as a Dogma so it is not a required belief as it is for Catholics.

This was very much like what I was planning to post.

 

[Billmccallister]

Having said that, what do the Eastern Catholics do with the Council of Florence and its declaration that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son?

I read somewhere it depends on the language used. It would be a heresy to add the filioque in the Eastern Churches because they use a different language and have different words than the Latins did. This is why I asked for the filioque not to be discussed.lol

 

[sidbrown]

You Latins just want us Easterners out of the church…right? Or to become good Roman Catholics…right?

This was something that was declared in 1274 at the Council of Lyons, well over 700 years ago and three hundred years before the Union of Brest in 1596.
"The dogma of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father and Son as one Principle is directly opposed to the error that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, not from the Son……**the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to be a dogma of faith **in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the Second council of Lyons (1274), and the Council of Florence (1438-1445).”
Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. September 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York. (Catholic Encyclopedia)
So contrary to what people here are claiming, it is clearly stated here with the approval and the nihil obstat and the imprimatur of the ecclesiastical authorities of New York that the doctrine of the filioque is a dogma of the Catholic faith.