Orthodox Churches on Catholic Apostolic Succession

[JesuXPIPassio]

Do the Orthodox Churches (both Oriental and Eastern) recognise the Catholic Church as having authentic Apostolic Succession? Also, how do they feel toward protestant communities in regard to validity?

 

[Claudius]

Do the Orthodox Churches (both Oriental and Eastern) recognise the Catholic Church as having authentic Apostolic Succession? Also, how do they feel toward protestant communities in regard to validity?

This should be asked at the NON Catholic religions forum. This forum is for authentic Eastern Catholic Churches.

 

[Nicholas82]

haha authentic… you really had to use that qualifier? Holy self-righteous ignorant smugness, Batman…

 

[josephdaniel29]

haha authentic… you really had to use that qualifier? Holy self-righteous ignorant smugness, Batman…

Well he’s right it should be in the non-Catholic forum, it’s where we “counterfeit” Orthodox hang out.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[Eisenhorn]

I read a bunch of snark here and no effort to answer. How about it?

 

[josephdaniel29]

Generally the Orthodox Church tends not to judge people outside of her bosom but I’ll give you one of the more common opinions.

The Catholic Church has maintained physical Apostolic Succession with an unbroken line of laying of hands from one generation to the next the problem comes with the other half of the equation. Apostolic Succession means a lot more than just an outward physical laying of hands as even Arius and Nestorius had this physical succession. True Apostolic Succession means the passing on of the Apostolic Faith, that which has been believed always, everywhere and by all and the Catholic Church fails that test. So the Catholic Church does possess the physical succession but because She doesn’t hold the Apostolic Faith it is incomplete.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[ASimpleSinner]

In the reception of Roman clergy into the EO, there has been at least three different canonical realities. (1) Some Byzantines, (like the Johnstown Greek Catholics, the liquidated Ukrainian Catholic Church, etc.) have been recieved into communion en masse perhaps with simple chrismation or an oath of allegiance to an Orthodox patriarch.

(2) SOME Roman clergy who married post ordination were NOT recieved as priests or re-ordained because it was the perception of the hierach that the petitioned that there Roman orders were valid, and that it would be uncanonical for them to serve as Orthodox priests, having entered marriage after ordination. (3) Others have roundly ignored this idea and accepted and incardinated ex-non-Orthodox clergy who contracted marriage after ordination, recognizing the ordination as valid but not recognizing the post-ordination marriage as an impediment…

(4) Some have been re-ordained (or in the eyes of some EO, ordained for the first time!) in the same mannner certain ex-Anglicans who have come to Rome have been. While it seems to be a minority opinion among what we recognize as mainstream EO (in the US) today, some pozit that the original Roman ordination was graceless. I believe this would be the likely view of the majority of “Old Calendar” Orthodox - some of whom are in communion with SOME national churches, some of whom are not.

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

haha authentic… you really had to use that qualifier? Holy self-righteous ignorant smugness, Batman…

I made no negative comment about the Orthodox Churches. The question clearly was asking what the Orthodox Churches think of the Catholic Churches. How is this self-reighteous when I’m clearly concerned with what the Orthodox Churches think?

Try reading and thinking before talking next time.

 

[josephdaniel29]

Try reading and thinking before talking next time.

Maybe you should follow your own advice, he was responding to Claudius not you.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[Allyson]

This should be asked at the NON Catholic religions forum. This forum is for authentic Eastern Catholic Churches.

Seems an equally legitimate question to as here. I believe that before I was a poster on CAF, there was one forum for all of Eastern CHRISTIANITY. This made more sense because so many issues overlap. However, I am not in charge.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Seems an equally legitimate question to as here. I believe that before I was a poster on CAF, there was one forum for all of Eastern CHRISTIANITY. This made more sense because so many issues overlap. However, I am not in charge.

What overlaps can be discussed in the non-Catholic or apologetics forums. To have a place where Catholics from the East and other parties can discuss their own Catholicism and practices may have made it more subdued, but it allows for greater involvement on the part of those that don’t want to get tangled in certain debates…

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

Maybe you should follow your own advice, he was responding to Claudius not you.

Yours in Christ
Joe

I don’t think I was talking to you, but even if you were right, how was I to know whom that post was meant for? Both of us did use the word “authentic” and there was no quote on that reply.

 

[Servus_Pio_XII]

I don’t think I was talking to you, but even if you were right, how was I to know whom that post was meant for? Both of us did use the word “authentic” and there was no quote on that reply.

Because, to your credit, your use of “authentic” was correct, charitable, and modified “Apostolic Succession”.

Claudius’ use was redundant, a deliberate attack on our Orthodox brothers in Christ, and modified “Eastern Catholic Churches” in a very exclusivist manner.