C
CatholicLife
Guest
Is it okay for Eastern Catholic Churches to have icons of Orthodox saints?
- Status
L
Little_Boy_Lost
Guest
Yes.
Here is a similar thread that might help you further.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=501288
Here is a similar thread that might help you further.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=501288
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
Dear Friend,
I’ve seen all sorts of Orthodox saints in Eastern Catholic Churches . . . I don’t see anything wrong with that since Rome never questions the canonizations of the Orthodox Churches and many Orthodox saints have been approved by Rome for liturgical veneration by Eastern Catholics over the years.
But I have what might be an interesting case for you.
A friend who is a Ukrainian Catholic priest in another city here took me on an icon tour of his church (which had been painted/written by Orthodox iconographers).
As he pointed out the icons of Augustine and Jerome, I noticed that both these saints’ icons had the title of “Blessed” (and not “Saint”) which is the title the Orthodox Church gives them (which suggests the Eastern Church takes issue with some of their teachings).
So it was an Orthodox rendering of saints we have in common . . .
Whenever I come across an icon of an Orthodox Saint, I don’t hesitate to add him or her to my icon corner.
On Sunday, October 10th, 2010, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church glorified Saint Athanasius, Bishop, in Poltava, Ukraine.
This holy bishop lived in the 18th century. He began as a married priest, but after he was widowed, he was tonsured a monk and became a bishop. His brilliant episcopal career came to an abrupt close when he was accused of, among other things, sexual misconduct and this by a jealous monastic . . .
Feeling that the public trial would bring disrepute on the Church, he decided to resign his post and take on the life of a monk. (He was later completely exonerated). Thus, he spent his remaining years in prayer and having to bear the inner pain and suffering of this event.
Miracles of healing occurred at his tomb since 1801 and his glorification as a saint was set by the Russian Synod for 1917, but the Russian Revolution prevented this.
He was declared a local Saint of the Ukrainian Orthodox church on Sunday last. I’ve no problem whatever with venerating him and he is invoked by those who are unjustly accused and who suffer public damage to their reputation. I also believe he could be privately venerated by Catholics of all ritual stripes and especially by priests who also suffer a similar kind of damage to their reputation as the result of the indiscretions and crimes of a very few other priests.
Holy Hierarch Athanasius of Poltava, pray unto God for us!
Alex
I’ve seen all sorts of Orthodox saints in Eastern Catholic Churches . . . I don’t see anything wrong with that since Rome never questions the canonizations of the Orthodox Churches and many Orthodox saints have been approved by Rome for liturgical veneration by Eastern Catholics over the years.
But I have what might be an interesting case for you.
A friend who is a Ukrainian Catholic priest in another city here took me on an icon tour of his church (which had been painted/written by Orthodox iconographers).
As he pointed out the icons of Augustine and Jerome, I noticed that both these saints’ icons had the title of “Blessed” (and not “Saint”) which is the title the Orthodox Church gives them (which suggests the Eastern Church takes issue with some of their teachings).
So it was an Orthodox rendering of saints we have in common . . .
Whenever I come across an icon of an Orthodox Saint, I don’t hesitate to add him or her to my icon corner.
On Sunday, October 10th, 2010, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church glorified Saint Athanasius, Bishop, in Poltava, Ukraine.
This holy bishop lived in the 18th century. He began as a married priest, but after he was widowed, he was tonsured a monk and became a bishop. His brilliant episcopal career came to an abrupt close when he was accused of, among other things, sexual misconduct and this by a jealous monastic . . .
Feeling that the public trial would bring disrepute on the Church, he decided to resign his post and take on the life of a monk. (He was later completely exonerated). Thus, he spent his remaining years in prayer and having to bear the inner pain and suffering of this event.
Miracles of healing occurred at his tomb since 1801 and his glorification as a saint was set by the Russian Synod for 1917, but the Russian Revolution prevented this.
He was declared a local Saint of the Ukrainian Orthodox church on Sunday last. I’ve no problem whatever with venerating him and he is invoked by those who are unjustly accused and who suffer public damage to their reputation. I also believe he could be privately venerated by Catholics of all ritual stripes and especially by priests who also suffer a similar kind of damage to their reputation as the result of the indiscretions and crimes of a very few other priests.
Holy Hierarch Athanasius of Poltava, pray unto God for us!
Alex
A
Aramis
Guest
Orthodoxy lacks the beattified/canonized distinction of Rome; Blessed ___ is a monastic saint, while St ___ is non-monastic.
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
Dear Aramis, servant of God,
Actually, “Venerable” is the title of a monastic saint. “Blessed” can be the title of any saint whose holiness was hidden in the world, but about which people attested after their death and there are other explanations.
The Orthodox Church calls “saint” anyone it canonizes and leaves the extent of their veneration up to the churches that do the canonizing.
So saints can be canonized by Mt. Athos and by individual monasteries, by bishops for regions, by Synods for countries and then Orthodox Churches may begin to venerate local saints to the point that they become universal. At every turn, they are called “saint” whereas the RC Church has the four-fold rank from Servant of God to Saint.
God bless you,
Alex
- Status