Eastern Theology

[arabic_catholic]

Hi ,

I went to a byzantine divine liturgy a while ago , and I asked the priest for confession . So when I confessed he told me that what I am confessing is not a mortal sin. Then when I asked a monk about it , he said to me that the Eastern Church follows John Chrysostom theology , while the West follows Augustinian theology on sin, and that therefore the priest reasoning on what is a mortal sin is different . His answer made a total sense to me. However , I still have doubts. for what I hear from priest and people sometimes is different than what I read in this site. is the Eastern Theology , within the Catholic Church, allowed to operate in its own way ? I mean since the East does not define a lot of things like the west , is it therefore follows that the Eastern (catholic not orthodox) rites follows a different theology of approaching scripture , sin , afterlife… etc. than that of the Latin Church ?

 

[MarioPop]

Hi ,

I went to a byzantine divine liturgy a while ago , and I asked the priest for confession . So when I confessed he told me that what I am confessing is not a mortal sin. Then when I asked a monk about it , he said to me that the Eastern Church follows John Chrysostom theology , while the West follows Augustinian theology on sin, and that therefore the priest reasoning on what is a mortal sin is different . His answer made a total sense to me. However , I still have doubts. for what I hear from priest and people sometimes is different than what I read in this site. is the Eastern Theology , within the Catholic Church, allowed to operate in its own way ? I mean since the East does not define a lot of things like the west , is it therefore follows that the Eastern (catholic not orthodox) rites follows a different theology of approaching scripture , sin , afterlife… etc. than that of the Latin Church ?

There is no difference between the Eastern Catholic church and the Latin Church regarding Scripture, sin, afterlife etc. Probably the priest was judging in his own way your sins, or you have done just venial sins . Definitely no difference, because I am going often to an Eastern Catholic church and do know well its theology . Courage!

 

[bben15]

Hello, If the priest told you it wasn’t a mortal sin, then it probably wasn’t a mortal sin. The important thing is that you received absolution for it.

There officially is no difference in theology between the Eastern and Western Catholic Churches. However, there is a difference in how the theology is interpreted. Even though there are many things, a good example would be purgatory. “Purgatory” is more of a Western term. The East doesn’t really use it, even though they believe in it. Eastern Catholics usually call it the “Final Theosis.” Eastern Catholics normally don’t believe that people suffer in the Final Theosis. They do however, believe you are purified of sins in this state.

There are many more things. I highly suggest you read up on the Eastern Catholic Churches. Catholicism is universal.

God Bless.

 

[arabic_catholic]

So are you guys saying that they are Eastern in their worship … Roman in their theology ? because I know for a fact that Eastern way of thinking (at least in EO) and theology is different than the western approach .

 

[Denho]

So are you guys saying that they are Eastern in their worship … Roman in their theology ? because I know for a fact that Eastern way of thinking (at least in EO) and theology is different than the western approach .

Theoretically, the Eastrrn Catholic Churches retain their whole patrimony, theology included, not just the outward liturgical practices.

Practically though, you can put lipstick on a pig and its still a pig… So, many Eastern Catholics play dress up but are entirely Roman theologically. It is the inevitable result of educating Eastern seminarians at Roman institutions…

 

[ronyodish]

So are you guys saying that they are Eastern in their worship … Roman in their theology ?

arabic catholic,

Assalamu 'alaika ya akhi,

Eastern/Oriental Catholics are called to restore and maintain their own theological traditions. These traditions are not only distinct from the theological tradition of the Latin Church, but also distinct amongst the various Eastern/Oriental Catholic Churches. The distinctions or differences are complementary with one another.

The Second Vatican council, in Lumen Gentium, affirmed the following in regards to theology (section 23):

==========================
By divine Providence it has come about that various churches, established in various places by the apostles and their successors, have in the course of time coalesced into several groups, organically united, which, preserving the unity of faith and the unique divine constitution of the universal Church, enjoy their own discipline, their own liturgical usage, and their own theological and spiritual heritage.​

Likewise, the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches affirms the following (canon 28):

==========================

1. A rite is the liturgical, theological, spiritual and disciplinary patrimony, culture and circumstances of history of a distinct people, by which its own manner of living the faith is manifested in each Church sui iuris. 2. The rites treated in this code, unless otherwise stated, are those which arise from the Alexandrian, Antiochene, Armenian, Chaldean and Constantinopolitan traditions.
   ==========================

You see then, the Holy Catholic Church acknowledges that there are allowable theological differences, and that such differences are no obstacle to a full communion between the various particular Churches.

What unites all of us as Catholics is the following:

1. Holy Faith and Morals
2. Holy Mysteries/Sacraments
3. Holy Hierarchy (Pope and Bishops in full communion)

What differentiates us, but in a complementary way, is the following:

1. Theology (How we express the Faith)
2. Liturgy (How we celebrate the Mysteries/Sacraments)
3. Spirituality (How we pray)
4. Disciplines (How we govern ourselves).

God bless,

Rony

 

[ConstantineTG]

Theoretically, the Eastrrn Catholic Churches retain their whole patrimony, theology included, not just the outward liturgical practices.

Practically though, you can put lipstick on a pig and its still a pig… So, many Eastern Catholics play dress up but are entirely Roman theologically. It is the inevitable result of educating Eastern seminarians at Roman institutions…

But that is a result of being in communion with Rome. If you are one body, you have the same blood flowing in you.

 

[smad0142]

But that is a result of being in communion with Rome. If you are one body, you have the same blood flowing in you.

I like this; I think this can apply to beliefs but ECs can still articulate beliefs differently than Latins. For example it is taught by Trent that Holy Orders confers an indelible mark on the soul whereas Eastern Orthodox theology does not hold to such a belief (difference between Augustinian and Cyprianic ideas of Holy Orders). So in your example of the common blood I would argue that ECs cannot believe that Holy Orders does not confer an indelible mark, they may explain it differently or emphasize the ministry of the Priest as an extension of the ministry of the Bishop but at the end of the day they cannot deny the teaching. So being in communion forces us to adjust some aspects of Eastern theology but that does not mean we can not be Eastern in an authentic way. We are just Eastern Catholics, not Eastern Orthodox nor should ECs act as if they are “closet” Orthodox.

 

[arabic_catholic]

arabic catholic,

Assalamu 'alaika ya akhi,

Eastern/Oriental Catholics are called to restore and maintain their own theological traditions. These traditions are not only distinct from the theological tradition of the Latin Church, but also distinct amongst the various Eastern/Oriental Catholic Churches. The distinctions or differences are complementary with one another.

The Second Vatican council, in Lumen Gentium, affirmed the following in regards to theology (section 23):

==========================
By divine Providence it has come about that various churches, established in various places by the apostles and their successors, have in the course of time coalesced into several groups, organically united, which, preserving the unity of faith and the unique divine constitution of the universal Church, enjoy their own discipline, their own liturgical usage, and their own theological and spiritual heritage.​

Likewise, the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches affirms the following (canon 28):

==========================

1. A rite is the liturgical, theological, spiritual and disciplinary patrimony, culture and circumstances of history of a distinct people, by which its own manner of living the faith is manifested in each Church sui iuris. 2. The rites treated in this code, unless otherwise stated, are those which arise from the Alexandrian, Antiochene, Armenian, Chaldean and Constantinopolitan traditions.
   ==========================

You see then, the Holy Catholic Church acknowledges that there are allowable theological differences, and that such differences are no obstacle to a full communion between the various particular Churches.

What unites all of us as Catholics is the following:

1. Holy Faith and Morals
2. Holy Mysteries/Sacraments
3. Holy Hierarchy (Pope and Bishops in full communion)

What differentiates us, but in a complementary way, is the following:

1. Theology (How we express the Faith)
2. Liturgy (How we celebrate the Mysteries/Sacraments)
3. Spirituality (How we pray)
4. Disciplines (How we govern ourselves).

God bless,

Rony

Wa alika al salam .

I find your post helpful . it contradict what others have stated over here, though. It does not make sense to claim to that you have a different rite , yet ignore the theology that created this rite… If what others have stated is correct , that makes the eastern rites look like just another musical service of the same theology , like … Organ Mass, Guitar mass, Maronite mass ! … I wish more people will discuss the thread for What Rony have stated is confirmed to me by many Eastern Catholics .

 

[Aramis]

Hello, If the priest told you it wasn’t a mortal sin, then it probably wasn’t a mortal sin. The important thing is that you received absolution for it.

There officially is no difference in theology between the Eastern and Western Catholic Churches. However, there is a difference in how the theology is interpreted. Even though there are many things, a good example would be purgatory. “Purgatory” is more of a Western term. The East doesn’t really use it, even though they believe in it. Eastern Catholics usually call it the “Final Theosis.” Eastern Catholics normally don’t believe that people suffer in the Final Theosis. They do however, believe you are purified of sins in this state.

There are many more things. I highly suggest you read up on the Eastern Catholic Churches. Catholicism is universal.

God Bless.

There are many theological differences. There are no dogmatic differences, tho’.

 

[bben15]

There are many theological differences. There are no dogmatic differences, tho’.

You are absolutely right. There are no differences in doctrine between the Eastern and Western Catholic Churches.

 

[Aramis]

You are absolutely right. There are no differences in doctrine between the Eastern and Western Catholic Churches.

THere ARE minor doctrinal differences. Not dogmatic ones, but doctrine (what is required to be taught) varies slightly amonst the various churches. The Doctrine on the Assumption of Mary vs the Dormition of the Theotokos is the most readily visible.

The Roman Church teaches (and requires be taught within the roman church) that Mary was assumed, body and soul together, into heaven.

The Byzantine doctrine is that she died, her soul flew to her son, her body was taken up, perfected and reunited with her soul.

It’s subtle, but it’s a doctrinal difference, since both sides require their version be taught by their clerics.

 

[bben15]

THere ARE minor doctrinal differences. Not dogmatic ones, but doctrine (what is required to be taught) varies slightly amonst the various churches. The Doctrine on the Assumption of Mary vs the Dormition of the Theotokos is the most readily visible.

The Roman Church teaches (and requires be taught within the roman church) that Mary was assumed, body and soul together, into heaven.

The Byzantine doctrine is that she died, her soul flew to her son, her body was taken up, perfected and reunited with her soul.

It’s subtle, but it’s a doctrinal difference, since both sides require their version be taught by their clerics.

Well, yes. There are MINOR differences. A good example would be what I explained about the differences in belief about purgatory.