Eastern Church teaching

  • Thread starter Thread starter Medi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Medi

Guest
I am confused about the Eastern Cathern Church’s teachings concerning “mortal and venial sin”. When can an Eastern Catholic receive communion if mortal sin does not exist? …and does the Eastern Catholic church have its own catachism?
Thank you. Medi
 
Who told you a Mortal Sin does not exist? The tendency in the East is not make a hard and fast formal distinction between mortal and venial sins. Certainly there are greater and lesser sins. Your conscience should be a big help to your here, if the Law of God is written on your heart.

Ultimately, only God can judge the severity of your missteps, assuming that you have tripped up now and again :o, I know I have.

Just go to confession at vespers before Divine Liturgy and you’ll be fine. Confession is good medicine, especially if your priest knows you and can discern trends in your choices and behavior. You can work on those things and better yourself, that’s what a spiritual director is for.

There have been Catechisms produced by Eastern Catholics for Eastern Catholics. I don’t know about the Maronites and Chaldeans but the Byzantines have produced a simple one in three short volumes (see Light for Life here and here). The UGCC is ready to release a new one, if they have not done so already, I have no info on it.

An older catechism by Father Casimir Kucharik (a UGCC priest) called “Our Faith” might be had in used book shops or on Ebay. Don’t look for the publisher Alleluia Press to have any because I got the very last one a few years ago :D.

The Divine Liturgy serves as a catechism, and in the Byzantine tradition (not sure of the others) it really works. One must follow the entire liturgical cycle but practically everything Byzantines believe is discernible in the Divine Liturgy and the Divine Praises.

Michael
 
Who told you a Mortal Sin does not exist? The tendency in the East is not make a hard and fast formal distinction between mortal and venial sins. Certainly there are greater and lesser sins. Your conscience should be a big help to your here, if the Law of God is written on your heart.

Ultimately, only God can judge the severity of your missteps, assuming that you have tripped up now and again :o, I know I have.

One should just go to confession at vespers before Divine Liturgy, every time if necessary. Confession is good medicine, especially if the priest knows us and can discern trends in our choices and behavior. We can work on those things and better ourselves, that’s what a spiritual director is for.

There have been Catechisms produced by Eastern Catholics for Eastern Catholics. I don’t know about the Maronites and Chaldeans but the Byzantines have produced a simple one in three short volumes (see Light for Life here and here). The UGCC is ready to release a new one, if they have not done so already, I have no info on it.

An older catechism by Father Casimir Kucharik (a UGCC priest) called “Our Faith” might be had in used book shops or on Ebay. Don’t look for the publisher Alleluia Press to have any because I got the very last one a few years ago :D.

The Divine Liturgy serves as a catechism, and in the Byzantine tradition (not sure of the others) it really works. One must follow the entire liturgical cycle but practically everything Byzantines believe is discernible in the Divine Liturgy and the Divine Praises.

Michael
 
Thank you Michael for your response. In answer to your question, "Who told you a Mortal Sin does not exist? ", a deacon in an Eatern Church did tell me that the Eastern Catholic Church makes no distinction between mortal and veniel sin as tought by the Latin Church and that all sin is an affront to God.
I am not familar with the Eastern Church’s Vespers. Can you explain it to me? Do vespers include confession?
Also I understand that belief in Purgatory only pertains to the Latin Church. However belief in Purgatory is a dogma of the Catholic Church and are not all Catholics bound by Catholic Church dogma and doctrine?
I do not intend this post for the sake of argument but for clarification.
Slava Isus Christu!
Medi
 
Hello Medi,
I just want to clarify up front that I am not in communion with Rome, and not the best person to answer your questions. I only saw a window of opportunity and I took it 😉
Thank you Michael for your response. In answer to your question, "Who told you a Mortal Sin does not exist? ", a deacon in an Eastern Church did tell me that the Eastern Catholic Church makes no distinction between mortal and veniel sin as tought by the Latin Church and that all sin is an affront to God.
His explanation sounds OK to me.

The mortal/venial distinction is a much later development. It is like scientifically categorizing sin, in my opinion. Over much of the East, if not all, that isn’t traditionally done. That doesn’t mean some Eastern Catholics and Orthodox haven’t been influenced by these concepts.

We also acknowledge that there are sins unto death, but were are not saying some sins are so minor one can still take communion. We are saying that all sins are serious to one degree or another, and we are unworthy in any case.

We are not counting sins so much as looking at the state of our hearts. Frequent confession is recommended, that way you don’t have to worry so much about whether you are worthy enough TODAY to receive communion. Just figure you’re not worthy anyway and trust in our loving God.

Your priest will know if you have not been to confession recently, and could refuse you if he thought it was really necessary. He carries a great burden.

The very act of receiving communion (is in a sense) expiatory. Even after having confessed, we acknowledge in liturgy before God that we are unworthy and still we ask to receive. The prayers of the liturgy make this clear…
Priest :* **In You, O Gracious Master, we place our whole life and hope, and we beseech, pray and implore You: ***
***make us worthy to partake with a pure conscience of Your heavenly and awesome mysteries from this sacred and spiritual altar, ***
***for the remission of sins, ***
***for the pardon of transgressions, ***
***for the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, ***
***for the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, ***
for confidence in You, and not for judgment, nor condemnation.
I am not familar with the Eastern Church’s Vespers. Can you explain it to me? Do vespers include confession?
If you are familiar with the Liturgy of the Hours (such as monastics and some laity will pray in a cycle of days and weeks), you will know that the first liturgical prayer of a ‘day’ is vespers, which comes at sundown.

The LOTH (contained in a most convenient Breviary in the west) which is often called Divine Praises once was very strongly practiced in parishes. The day actually begins at sun down.

In the Russian tradition vespers the night before would be the time to start making the Day of Resurrection a holy one through prayer, and if possible confession. So one comes to church and participates in Vespers Saturday night, then makes a confession and goes home to rest, returning in the morning for Orthros and Divine Liturgy.

Most of the Byzantine Catholic churches are not doing this, I understand. Vespers has often been replaced by the Saturday anticipatory Mass. Oddly, a little known fact is that for Eastern Catholics, attendence at Vespers counts toward one’s Sunday obligation, even absent the Holy Eucharist! I cannot explain the reasoning for that but the canons were approved by the Vatican.
Also I understand that belief in Purgatory only pertains to the Latin Church. However belief in Purgatory is a dogma of the Catholic Church and are not all Catholics bound by Catholic Church dogma and doctrine?
I cannot answer that question. Perhaps someone else will take it up. There are Eastern Catholic deacons and even priests who read this forum, I am sure they all have something to say about it.
I do not intend this post for the sake of argument but for clarification.
Slava Isus Christu!
Medi
You have been fine.

Your most unworthy friend,
Michael
 
There is actually a great deal of debate about these matters among Eastern Catholics. My former pastor, for example, is a Ruthenian Catholic priest. While he solidly holds to the Eastern Liturgical practices, spiritualities, and theological language, he believes that he is “Catholic first”. Thus, he firmly believes that all Catholics, including Eastern Catholics, are bound to believe in Purgatory, the Immaculate Conception, Papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction, the distinction between mortal and venial sin, etc. He believes that there is such a thing as an Eastern approach to these matters, but that no Catholic may reject them. On the other hand, you have many in the Eastern Catholic Churches who reject many of the above mentioned dogmas. They call them “Latin innovations” or, if accepted in the east, “Latinizations”. I presonally think that this second group is in grave error but they believe themselves to faithful to the Catholic Church and I certainly am in no place to judge the status of their relationship with God. I will have to simply disagree with them.
 
Thank you Hesychios and East and West for your learned response to my posts. I am surprise that there are many opinion’s regarding the subjects. As we know the four marks of the Catholic Church are,“one, holy catholic and apostolic.” How can we be of the one true faith when we so differ in the understanding and acceptance of Catholic dogma?

Another touchy subject may be the obligation to attend Divine Liturgy on Sundays and Holy days. Anyone care to hop in?
Regards,
Medi
 
Another touchy subject may be the obligation to attend Divine Liturgy on Sundays and Holy days. Anyone care to hop in?
Regards,
Medi
The Eastern understanding is that we don’t have an obligation any more than we have an obligation to breath or eat! That is, attending the Divine Liturgy on Sundays and Holy Days is a matter of life – spiritual life. The concept of “obligation” is foreign to the East – that arises out of a juridic approach found primarily in the West. For the East, the Mysteries are medicinal and we need to take our medicine as prescribed.

Thus, while the concept of “obligation” doesn’t exist the underlying teachings are the same: attendance at Divine Liturgy is as much a necessity for our spiritual life as breathing is for our physical life. And, yes, it is sinful to miss the Divine Liturgy without good reason just as it is sinful in the West to miss Mass without good reason.

Deacon Ed
 
Dear Deacon Ed,
Beautifully articulated. Thank you.
Slava Isusu Christu - Christ is risen! Glorify Him!
Medi
 
Dear Deacon Ed,
Beautifully articulated. Thank you.
Slava Isusu Christu - Christ is risen! Glorify Him!
Medi
Slava Isusu Christu! : Slava na viki!

Christ is Risen! : Indeed He is Risen!

Glorify Him! is the English response to Christ is Born!

Just a little clarification…

Ung (X.B.! B.B.!)
 
. As we know the four marks of the Catholic Church are,“one, holy catholic and apostolic.” How can we be of the one true faith when we so differ in the understanding and acceptance of Catholic dogma?
Well, that is another huge problem that needs to be ironed out. Most traditional Catholics like myself would say that all Catholics, including Eastern Catholics are bound to follow all of the same teachings of the Church all the way through Vatican II. I think do deny any of these teachings is a grave sin. Consider the fact that Vatican I actaully pronounces an anathema on anyone who rejects the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. This means that anyone, whether he be a western modernist or one of the particular Eastern Catholics who thinks that the assent of faith to the doctrine of Papal Infallibility is not required of the East is techinically under an anathema. Such a person is tearing at the unity of the Church and duing so under the title “Catholic”. This is sad but we have to realize that both in the East and in the West there will always be people who are not faithful to the teachings of the Church. We have to remember that Christ came to save sinners, not the righteous. The best we can do is pray for these poor souls, both in the East and in the West. Just something to think about: my former Ruthenian Pastor said the following concering those who deny any of the teachings of the Church. “They’re not Catholic.” While I am certainly in no place to judge the Catholicity of another soul, I think his statement can help us to understand how serious the matter is and how one can put his soul into great danger by straying from the wisdom of Holy Mother Church.
 
Well, that is another huge problem that needs to be ironed out. Most traditional Catholics like myself would say that all Catholics, including Eastern Catholics are bound to follow all of the same teachings of the Church all the way through Vatican II. I think do deny any of these teachings is a grave sin. Consider the fact that Vatican I actaully pronounces an anathema on anyone who rejects the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. This means that anyone, whether he be a western modernist or one of the particular Eastern Catholics who thinks that the assent of faith to the doctrine of Papal Infallibility is not required of the East is techinically under an anathema. Such a person is tearing at the unity of the Church and duing so under the title “Catholic”. This is sad but we have to realize that both in the East and in the West there will always be people who are not faithful to the teachings of the Church. We have to remember that Christ came to save sinners, not the righteous. The best we can do is pray for these poor souls, both in the East and in the West. Just something to think about: my former Ruthenian Pastor said the following concering those who deny any of the teachings of the Church. “They’re not Catholic.” While I am certainly in no place to judge the Catholicity of another soul, I think his statement can help us to understand how serious the matter is and how one can put his soul into great danger by straying from the wisdom of Holy Mother Church.
Let me guess, you’re former Ruthenian pastor was a Roman Catholic Bi-Ritual priest, right?

U-C
 
Nope. He was just a faithful Catholic. Nice try though.
50% of the Ruthenian Metropolia’s priests are Roman Catholic Bi-Ritual and Incardinated priests. What parish did he serve? When was he ordained and in which Eparchy?

Christ is Risen! Indeed He is Risen!

U-C
 
50% of the Ruthenian Metropolia’s priests are Roman Catholic Bi-Ritual and Incardinated priests. What parish did he serve? When was he ordained and in which Eparchy?

Christ is Risen! Indeed He is Risen!

U-C
He is NOT Biritual. He was ordained a Ruthenian Priest, not a Latin one. He the pastor of our awesome little parish here in Albuquerque, NM, Our Lady of Perpetual Help; He is extremely ill and is one of the most sainlty men I have ever personally known. I am not sure when he was ordained.
 
He is NOT Biritual. He was ordained a Ruthenian Priest, not a Latin one. He the pastor of our awesome little parish here in Albuquerque, NM, Our Lady of Perpetual Help; He is extremely ill and is one of the most sainlty men I have ever personally known. I am not sure when he was ordained.
Is not Fr. Zuger a Roman Catholic by birth, and was incardinated into the Van Nuys Eparchy, no?

U-C
 
Is not Fr. Zuger a Roman Catholic by birth, and was incardinated into the Van Nuys Eparchy, no?

U-C
Zugger (not Zuger, since you do seem to be picky with outhers about proper spelling)

You sound like Sen. McCarthy asking if he were a communist or worse–bi-ritual! To be Roman Catholic by birth alone makes a priest bi-ritual?:confused:

While he was raised Roman Catholic, he was ordained to the priesthood in the Eparchy of Passaic in 1981, served in Beltsville MD, Rahway NJ, Phoenix AZ, Gilbert AZ and Albuquerque NM.

He isn’t bi-ritual, as you are heavily implying, as though it were a sin to be…And even if he were…what’s the point you are trying to make?

cnewa.com/mag-article-bodypg-us.aspx?articleID=3154

olphnm.org/olph/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=59
 
Zugger (not Zuger, since you do seem to be picky with outhers about proper spelling)

You sound like Sen. McCarthy asking if he were a communist or worse–bi-ritual! To be Roman Catholic by birth alone makes a priest bi-ritual?:confused:

While he was raised Roman Catholic, he was ordained to the priesthood in the Eparchy of Passaic in 1981, served in Beltsville MD, Rahway NJ, Phoenix AZ, Gilbert AZ and Albuquerque NM.

He isn’t bi-ritual, as you are heavily implying, as though it were a sin to be…And even if he were…what’s the point you are trying to make?

cnewa.com/mag-article-bodypg-us.aspx?articleID=3154

olphnm.org/olph/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=59
He wasn’t raised an Eastern Catholic, so he was a Roman Catholic that became an Eastern Catholic. I’m sure he was first enrolled as a Roman Catholic in a Roman Catholic seminary, who then asked to be incardinated into the Ruthenian Metropolia, and then ordained by the Passaic Eparch. This is the case of many priests serving in the Ruthenian Metropolia. I really don’t see much of a difference for those who leave the Roman Catholic seminary to become Eastern Catholic and priests who are Bi-Ritual.

Christ is Risen! Indeed He is Risen!

U-C
 
I really don’t see much of a difference for those who leave the Roman Catholic seminary to become Eastern Catholic and priests who are Bi-Ritual.
Huh? Bi-ritual priests continue in their native tradition, while also serving on occasion - sometimes often, sometimes not - in churches of other traditions. Father Zugger gravitated to and immersed himself in our tradition. UC, I am sure you know also of his work in the old country, the mission society, his writings. And his parish is generating vocations in our church.
.
So stop already - you sound like those folks who complained that your grandparents didn’t belong in America
 
He wasn’t raised an Eastern Catholic, so he was a Roman Catholic that became an Eastern Catholic.<…>
U-C
AHHHHH!!! So he isn’t really “Eastern” enough for you because he wasn’t born and raised EC. I know of bi-ritual priests who have a better understanding of the Eastern Catholic church than some so called cradle Eastern Catholic priests quite possibly because they studied the EC in great detail and zeal.

So, for one to be qualified as Eastern Catholic, in your view one must be raised Eastern Catholic to be considered an Eastern Catholic. Therefore anyone outside the EC church should just give up and not bother to join us for they will never be “Eastern” enough?

Not a very sound plan of evangelisation for any church, East or West, Orthodox or Catholic.

BTW, Christ has Ascended inGlory! (for those of us who are still catholic, calendarwise)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top