A
Augustine3
Guest
From a Catholic perspective, do the Orthodox Bishops have the power to “bind and loose”?
- Status
F
fhansen
Guest
I’d sure think so since the CC recognizes the EO in any case as being true Church and the bishops as having apostolic succession.
P
praestat_fides
Guest
I heard somewhere that when an episcopal bishop is ordained, a Catholic Priest has to go to the ceremony and lay hands to make it valid.
W
whoisdiss
Guest
I would think so since the Catholic Church reconizes Eastern Orthodox as having valid apostolic succesion. Though the power of binding and loosing may only be reserved for the Catholic Church. I could be wrong.
A
Augustine3
Guest
I thought the Orthodox Bishops would, but then I also meditated on what scripture says. The apostles were given the power to bind and loose after St Peter, but how exactly can they bind and loose without the keys given solely to St Peter?
I had a further search into he Catechism of the Catholic Church and found this paragraph:
The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter’s successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff – CCC 883
Notice is says “body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff”, so what of the Orthodox Bishops? We acknowledge their valid orders for the Eucharist and other sacraments but what about binding and loosing? It makes me now ponder what exactly does it mean to “bind and loose”?
I had a further search into he Catechism of the Catholic Church and found this paragraph:
The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter’s successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff – CCC 883
Notice is says “body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff”, so what of the Orthodox Bishops? We acknowledge their valid orders for the Eucharist and other sacraments but what about binding and loosing? It makes me now ponder what exactly does it mean to “bind and loose”?
A
Abu
Guest
Not apart from the Pope. How could they when that was imparted first to St Peter and later only to the Apostles. Such binding and loosing is thus based on Christ’s words to the Apostles: “Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth shall be loosed also in heaven.” [Matt. 18:18]. As should be clear, it is for the Church, in virtue of this apostolic authority of “binding” and “loosing”, to decide what disciplinary laws should be enacted, maintained, modified or abolished.
“9. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema.” (*Pastor Aeternus *of Ecumenical Council Vatican I).
In the Council of Florence, to which for a very brief time the Eastern Orthodox adhered, we read, “We believe the Roman Pontiff is the true Vicar of Christ, the Head of the whole Church, the Father and Teacher of all Christians, and that to him in the person of Peter was given by our Lord Jesus Christ, the full power of feeding, ruling, and governing the whole Church.”
During the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon in the 5th century, the Bishops there shouted out together, after a letter from Pope Leo was read to them, “Peter has spoken through the mouth of Leo.” Saint Hippolytus wrote, “We are all bound by God to profess the faith which is guarded by the Chair of Peter.”
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4122
The error of the Orthodox is identified below:
Answer by Matthew Bunson on 04-03-2009 (EWTN):
“The Orthodox do not accept that his special position as bishop of Rome grants him supreme jurisdictional authority; nor does it grant a charisma of infallibility. Above all, the Orthodox consider the power of the ecumenical council far greater than any pope.”
tinyurl.com/nfczs82
Answer by Rev. Mark J. Gantley, JCL on 08-08-2009 (EWTN):
“The pope must ratify all council decisions, and the bishops cannot act contrary to the pope, just as the other apostles could not decide something against the apostle Peter (Acts 15).”
tinyurl.com/kkb2ffn
A
Abu
Guest
Catholic Apologetics Online
Fathers Rumble and Carty
1255. Was the Christian Church governed from the beginning with the Bishop of Rome as supreme and infallible head, or by a Council of Bishops?
The Church from the very beginning was governed by the Bishops, including the Bishop of Rome, all the other Bishops being in union with and subject to the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome. At times the Bishops met together in Councils for more important deliberations, and **the decisions of these Councils were acknowledged as binding provided they were approved and sanctioned by the Bishop of Rome as supreme head of the Church. ** [My bold].
radioreplies.info/site-search.php?q=Binding%26Loosing&db=2
Fathers Rumble and Carty
1255. Was the Christian Church governed from the beginning with the Bishop of Rome as supreme and infallible head, or by a Council of Bishops?
The Church from the very beginning was governed by the Bishops, including the Bishop of Rome, all the other Bishops being in union with and subject to the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome. At times the Bishops met together in Councils for more important deliberations, and **the decisions of these Councils were acknowledged as binding provided they were approved and sanctioned by the Bishop of Rome as supreme head of the Church. ** [My bold].
radioreplies.info/site-search.php?q=Binding%26Loosing&db=2
M
Marty_E
Guest
Without defining binding and loosing you’re going to have significant problems answering this.
Let’s begin by noting that in Catholic theology the episcopate in the Orthodox communion possess valid orders. Unlike the Orthodox we do not tie validity with right belief in the same way (what is called “economy”).
This means that in an emergency a Catholic can receive the Eucharist from Orthodox clergy, for one example, because it is truly the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior.
Binding and loosing, however, deals with jurisdiction, not validity. The two circumstances where the question of jurisdiction is encountered by a Catholic would be the Sacrament of Reconciliation and a declaration of annulment in a marriage case. Both require jurisdiction.
Even a Catholic priest may lack jurisdiction if he is under some restriction, if he is not within his incardinated diocese, or if the sin confessed is restricted to a bishop or the Holy Father.
Therefore, relative to a Catholic, the Orthodox bishops lack jurisdiction.
The exceptions deal with Orthodox bishops and their own flocks and certain dire circumstances.
Any Catholic in danger of death may confess to any validly ordained priest, including the Orthodox, and jurisdiction is granted. The same is true of a Catholic confessing to a defrocked or restricted Catholic clergy.
.
A
Augustine3
Guest
I think there’s more to it than jurisdiction. Think about it logically, even though the apostles were given the authority to bind and loose what good is it without the keys? A door cannot open without keys and only one person has them - St Peter. That is why it’s vital that the bishops must be in communion with the pope.
Furthermore, you’ll notice in a previous post the power to bind and loose is exercised in the Church Councils. The Orthodox do not believe in the Immaculate Conception or Purgatory. We Catholics are bound to believe otherwise we risk being heretics. So even if you’re permitted to receive the Eucharist from the Orthodox you are not permitted to disbelieve Catholic doctrine.
E
ezeekl
Guest
Generally no. It is only when they meet in a general council and then only if the Pope agrees with their position on any particular issue. Someone once posted (in a separate thread) on here a list of all the Patriarchs of Constantinople who taught error along with the particular heresy they espoused. I believe there was about 46 of them. I wanted to copy the list and check it out myself but didn’t. Hopefully, whoever that poster was, will see this and repost the list here.
M
Marty_E
Guest
Jurisdiction is the power of the keys to bind and loose.
The dogmatic issues you raise are a separate matter.
.
M
Marty_E
Guest
You are confusing the magisterium, the teaching office, with jurisdiction, which is the power of the keys.
What you’ve described is the teaching office and the charism of infallibility.
.
A
Augustine3
Guest
I didn’t deny jurisdiction is power to bind and loose, I said there’s more to it than just that.
The dogmatic issues are not separate. The councils have placed anathemas for disbelief of Catholic dogmas which is obviously exercising their power to “loose”.
A
Augustine3
Guest
The power to bind and loose is inseparable to the keys. How can you bind in heaven if you don’t have the keys to open the gates of heaven? What bishops bind is worthless without being in communion to St Peter’s successor who alone possess the keys.
Have you read through this thread? Councils clearly have the power to bind and loose.
M
Marty_E
Guest
A
Augustine3
Guest
Anathemas are charged against anyone i.e. individuals who don’t believe not just a party. Doesn’t an Anathema have the power to loose in heaven? Yes.
I quote you a second time. Please read the bold line which tells us clearly Councils are acknowledged as binding.
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree
M
Marty_E
Guest
Actually judging someone and levying a penalty is the power of binding and loosing.
The granting of the power involved Jesus stating “whose sins you forgive are forgiven, and whose sins you retain are retained”.
The Church’s teaching authority comes from the promise that the “Holy Spirit will be with you until the end of time” and “Who hears you, hears Me”.
Judging = power of the keys
Teaching = teaching charism, the magisterium
.
E
ezeekl
Guest
Not really, the original question was:
"From a Catholic perspective, do the Orthodox Bishops have the power to “bind and loose”? "
Can the magisterium be fallible? If a teaching is bound on earth and heaven is it not infallible? Individual bishops, Orthodox as well as Catholic, do not have the binding and loosening power and so they can and have, taught error. Nestorius, who was bishop of Constantinople, is one that people would immediately recognize.
- Status