Valid But Illicit is generally the hardliner view; you go beyond, claiming no benefit; this directly contradicts both the CCEO and CIC canons permitting Catholics to receive sacraments from Orthodox priests.
You still fail to understand what I am trying to communicate.
The Canons allow Catholics to receive from Orthodox in certain circumstances. Those Catholics would receive the benefit of the sacrament because they hold the Catholic faith and they are going because the Church permits them to by its Canon Law.
There may be members of the Orthodox Church who are in good faith and of good will. This good faith and good will that will eventually lead them to embrace full unity with Rome like it did with St. Josaphat. In the meantime members validly baptized in those Churches are CATHOLICS (and receive benefit from the sacraments) until they embrace heresy or schism. In other words these Orthodox Christians are not OUTSIDE the Church–they ARE Catholics.
Read this:
**Pope Pius XI, Ecclesiam Dei, Encyclical on St. Josaphat, Nov. 12, 1923: **“Our Saint [Josaphat] was born of schismatic parents but was validly baptized and received the name of John. From his earliest years he lived a saintly life. Although he was much impressed by the splendors of the Slavic liturgy, he always sought therein first and foremost the truth and glory of God. Because of this, and not because he was impressed by arguments, even as a child he turned towards communion with the Ecumenical, that is, the Catholic Church. **Of this Church he always considered himself a member because of the valid baptism which he had received. ** What is more, he felt himself called by a special Providence to re-establish everywhere the holy unity of the Church.”
Pope Pius XI says here in Ecclesiam Dei that St. Josaphat was born of Orthodox parents in an area which was separated from the Chair of Peter and acceptance of the Papacy. St. Josaphat was validly baptized as an infant (and thus became a Catholic). As he grew up, he attended the Eastern Orthodox liturgy with his parents, but was still a Catholic and even “saintly” according to Pope Pius XI. He was a Catholic, even though he was attending a schismatic church building, because he had not obstinately embraced the Eastern Schism by rejecting the Papacy. Thus, his baptism as an infant made him a member of the Church (and subject to the Roman Pontiff) and he did not cease to be a member until he obstinately embraced schism or heresy, which he did not, even though he was attending a schismatic church with his parents. This is a precise articulation of the position on when the baptized children of heretics become schismatics and/or heretics: it is not at the age of reason, but when they obstinately embrace schism or heresy.
