Eastern Catholics defending Orthodoxy vs Roman Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter OraProNobis333
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Church has authority over form of Sacraments, so it can amend form needed for validity.
 
OraProNobis333 said:
This is only true of Orthodox (as no other church has all 7 Sacraments).
Click to expand...
I’m assuming you mean E. Orthodox, so I feel the need to add that it’s true of most apostolic churches, including those we call oriental orthodox who separated from what would become Catholic and E. Orthodox churches 5 centuries or more, earlier. I don’t think any of them lacks a single sacrament.
 
Rubee said:
I’m assuming you mean E. Orthodox, so I feel the need to add that it’s true of most apostolic churches, including those we call oriental orthodox who separated from what would become Catholic and E. Orthodox churches 5 centuries or more, earlier. I don’t think any of them lacks a single sacrament.
Click to expand...
The idea of a “seven” sacraments came into place around the 13th century or so. Due to pressure from the Latin Church. The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox followed suit and pretty much have the exact same 7 sacraments. I read about this about a month ago or so. Let me check back on this reference. Only the Church of the East has a different set of 7 sacraments (they have main ones such as Eucharist, confession, baptism, chrismation, and priesthood- but marriage for them is a sacramental). Church of the East has some interesting sacraments such as Holy Bread (Malka) and Sign of the Cross.
 
Last edited:
Alexandria2020 said:
The idea of a “seven” sacraments came into place around the 13th century or so. Due to pressure from the Latin Church.
Click to expand...
I read it from “The Sacraments of the Assyrian Church of the East” by Most Rev. Mar Awa Royel, Bishop of California.

See below… a portion of it.
The second influence for enumerating the sacraments is generally traced back to the Latin influence exerted over rather much of the Christian East during the Second Council of Lyons (1272-1274). During this Western council’s fourth session, an ad hoc union was forged between the Latin and Greek Churches—the Greek position being forced by the Byzantine Emperor Michael VIII Paleologos. It was the confessio fidei of the emperor submitted to Pope Gregory X during the fourth session of the council that contained an enumeration of the seven sacraments, held in common by the Geek and Latin Churches. The Byzantine emperor declared:

The same Holy Roman Church also holds and teaches that there are seven sacraments of the Church: one is baptism, which has been mentioned above; another is the sacrament of confirmation which bishops confer by the laying on of hands while they anoint the reborn; then penance, the Eucharist, the sacrament of order, matrimony and extreme unction which, according to the doctrine of the Blessed James, [James 5:14-15] is administered to the sick. The same Roman Church performs [ conficit ] the sacrament of the Eucharist with unleavened bread; she holds and teaches that in this sacrament the bread is truly transubstantiated into the body of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the wine into His blood. As regards matrimony, she holds that neither is a man allowed to have several wives at the same time nor a woman several husbands. But, when a legitimate marriage is dissolved by the death of one of the spouses, she declares that a second and afterwards a third wedding are successively licit, if no other canonical impediment goes against it for any reason.1
Click to expand...
 
You’re wrong. They’re schismatic. Read Unam Sanctam (Boniface VIII).
 
The Magisterium can not contradict itself. Every human being needs to be subject to the Roman Pontiff for salvation. Eastern schismatics are in rebelion against the autorithy of the Holy
Father.
 
Last edited:
LostSheep7 said:
The Magisterium can not contradict itself. Every human being needs to be subject to the Roman Pontiff for salvation. Eastern schismatics are in rebelion against the autorithy of the Holy Father.
Click to expand...
This clearly requires further interpretation, considering the Roman Catholic Church has approved the veneration of certain Orthodox saints.
 
Lobster_Johnson said:
This clearly requires further interpretation, considering the Roman Catholic Church has approved the veneration of certain Orthodox saints.
Click to expand...
And, according to VII, we Orthodox, in the mind of the Catholic Church, have valid Sacraments.

ZP
 
ziapueblo said:
And, according to VII, we Orthodox, in the mind of the Catholic Church, have valid Sacraments.
Click to expand...
The Roman Martyrology lists several Orthodox saints, such as St. Sergius.

Volume 2 of the Anthologion was published by Rome in the 70’s and restored the liturgical veneration of St. Gregory Palamas.

St. Gregory of Narek was in schism with Rome, and is considered a Doctor of the Church.

I’m not sure what the name of the document is, but Pope Pius XII approved several Russian saints for veneration in 1940.
 
Last edited:
Lobster_Johnson said:
Volume 2 of the Anthologion was published by Rome in the 70’s and restored the liturgical veneration of St. Gregory Palamas.

St. Gregory of Narek was in schism with Rome, and is considered a Doctor of the Church.
Click to expand...
. . . . How can any pious catholic venerate someone like Palamas, who was a fierce enemy of the Papacy? Same for Mark of Ephesus, for example
 
Last edited:
LostSheep7 said:
It’s a symptom of the Crisis of the Faith brought by Vatican II. How can any pious catholic venerate someone like Palamas, who was a fierce enemy of the Papacy? Same for Mark of Ephesus, for example
Click to expand...
Except Palamas was venerated liturgically even before this. The practice was suppressed, and restored in the 70s.

These men were not correct in all of their beliefs, but they lived holier lives than I can ever hope to. I have no problem venerating them.
 
Lobster_Johnson said:
These men were not correct in all of their beliefs, but they lived holier lives than I can ever hope to.
Click to expand...
How can someone be holy while hating the true religion? How can you have Charity without having Faith?
 
Last edited:
LostSheep7 said:
Yes, you do, but illicit
Click to expand...
Illicit but valid 🤔

Interesting that your Patriarch, the Pope of Rome, has not problem allowing you to commune in our Church. Why would he allow you to partake in an illicit Sacrament?
LostSheep7 said:
Could you provide any sources for your affirmation? Thanks
Click to expand...
For one, the Byzantine Catholic Church venerates Saint Gregory Palamas on the Second Sunday of Great Lent. This is the Sunday Gospel Reflection from Father Hezikias and his brother, Father Sebastian. Both Melkite Greek Catholics and Father Hezikias is the founder of the Institute of Catholic Culture.

There is a list that has been posted on the Eastern forum of Saints that the Catholic Church officially venerates, and they are post-schism Russian Saints.

Saint Pope John Paul II has called Gregory Palamas a saint, as well as Saint Seraphim of Sarov.

Here is an article from EWTN on Honoring Eastern Orthodox Saints.

God bless!

ZP
 
One other comment: we Eastern Catholic have our own sui iuris churches. We don’t need Rome to approve our Saints.
 
@LostSheep7

This is an article regarding the Sunday of Palamas (second Sunday of Lent in the Byzantine Tradition) from the Eparchy of Newton. The Eparchy of Newton is the Melkite Greek Catholic Eparchy here in America which is in full communion with the Holy See.

ZP
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top