St. Mark of Ephesus

[Ghosty]

It is true that he regarded the Filioque as a heresy. So did and does the entire Orthodox East - he was simply defending the position of his Church.

The fact is that if the West had agreed to simply going back to the original Creed that the Roman Catholic Church had itself zealously guarded for so many centuries, then “God would have healed the heresy.”

I don’t believe that the Filioque is a heresy. I do believe it is a clumsy and theologically unnecessary construct that obfuscates Triadology - but the West will be the West. I do believe, with Mark and Orthodoxy and not a few Eastern Catholics - with some Roman Catholics - that the Filioque should simply be dropped from a Creed intended to express the universal faith of the entire Church.

Alex

And that is all well and good and reasonable.

I’m simply pointing out that 1) Mark of Ephesus was in error, from the Catholic perspective, for considering the filioque a heresy and rejecting reunion on that ground, and 2) is commemorated chiefly for his stance against the filioque and against reunion, though he may have led a holy life and caused miracles after death. The prayers commemorating him, posted here by Mickey, confirm this fact.

These aren’t insults, they’re simply the facts. I don’t expect the Eastern Orthodox who embrace Mark of Ephesus’ views to stand against him; on the contrary! I’m simply pointing out a Catholic perspective on him, as is appropriate for an Eastern Catholic forum.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Cavaradossi]

And that is all well and good and reasonable.

I’m simply pointing out that 1) Mark of Ephesus was in error, from the Catholic perspective, for considering the filioque a heresy and rejecting reunion on that ground, and 2) is commemorated chiefly for his stance against the filioque and against reunion, though he may have led a holy life and caused miracles after death. The prayers commemorating him, posted here by Mickey, confirm this fact.

These aren’t insults, they’re simply the facts. I don’t expect the Eastern Orthodox who embrace Mark of Ephesus’ views to stand against him; on the contrary! I’m simply pointing out a Catholic perspective on him, as is appropriate for an Eastern Catholic forum.

Peace and God bless!

This is, of course, where it gets confusing, because of the call from Rome for the Eastern Catholic Churches to get closer to their Eastern patrimony. It is very fascinating (for me as an outsider at least) to see, among the Eastern Catholics who regularly post here, the great diversity of opinions as to just how that call should be interpreted.

Edit: I made it to my 1000th post! For some reason, that is mildly exciting to me.

 

[ConstantineTG]

This is, of course, where it gets confusing, because of the call from Rome for the Eastern Catholic Churches to get closer to their Eastern patrimony. It is very fascinating (for me as an outsider at least) to see, among the Eastern Catholics who regularly post here, the great diversity of opinions as to just how that call should be interpreted.

Well, Eastern Catholics love their patrimony, but also love being in communion with the Pope. That is why we fight for that communion even though it brings us much sorrow from persecution even among Roman Catholics whom are supposed to be in communion with us. That is why even though there is respect and admiration for the Orthodox saints, we cannot fully embrace them because of those “jabs” at the Catholic Church whom we love as much as Orthodoxy.

Edit: I made it to my 1000th post! For some reason, that is mildly exciting to me.

Congratulations

 

[Marcarios]

The Times these saints lived , they also lived during the occupation of The Byzantine Empire (what was left) by The Franks, Venetians, and Genoese. Well what can be expected by Saints of their times? The Turkish Occupation was bad enough, but of course what do you tell people whos lands are being occupied by people who say they want union with you , but will be over you as well?

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

This is, of course, where it gets confusing, because of the call from Rome for the Eastern Catholic Churches to get closer to their Eastern patrimony. It is very fascinating (for me as an outsider at least) to see, among the Eastern Catholics who regularly post here, the great diversity of opinions as to just how that call should be interpreted.

Yes, watching the same process has really expanded my imagination as a Roman Catholic - learning about things from a different perspective is really helpful to me. It prevents me from getting bogged down in just one theological framework.

I find this especially true when I encounter the thoughts, insights, perspectives, etc. of those eastern Catholics who style themselves “Orthodox in communion with Rome.”

Edit: I made it to my 1000th post! For some reason, that is mildly exciting to me.

Hey, spiffy! Congratulations!

 

[Mickey]

Edit: I made it to my 1000th post! For some reason, that is mildly exciting to me.

Rookie.

 

[Apotheoun]

This is, of course, where it gets confusing, because of the call from Rome for the Eastern Catholic Churches to get closer to their Eastern patrimony. It is very fascinating (for me as an outsider at least) to see, among the Eastern Catholics who regularly post here, the great diversity of opinions as to just how that call should be interpreted.

Eastern Catholics are quirky, and I say that as an Eastern Catholic.

As far as St. Mark of Ephesus is concerned, I do not believe that he was in error, and I venerate him as a holy defender and pillar of Orthodoxy.

Edit: I made it to my 1000th post! For some reason, that is mildly exciting to me.

Congratulations . . . I suppose that is a grand achievement. It will probably take me a decade to reach that many posts; and alas 522 of my 850 posts were deleted in the 2007 purge of the Eastern Christianity forum.

 

[MarkosC]

re: the part of the OP:

Do Byzantine Catholics [snip] commemorate him in their liturgies by chanting his troparion and kontakion?

St Mark is not in the official service books of any Orthodox Church AFAIK. (Orthodox and Greek Catholics both use, AFAIK, almost exactly the same original Greek texts. The service books in essentially their current form were at least a hundred years old on the day he was born). He is remembered on his day, but the Vespers/Orthros/Liturgy/Paraklesis texts for him are optional.

As for commemoration, one is not a saint because one is a propaganda icon, but because one lived a holy life which allowed one to be with God after death (i.e. b/c one “got to heaven”. Commemoration by the church on Earth happens because God chose to reveal that you’re with him through miracles and the canonization process. Since the Orthodox churches are “real” churches which use an older canonization process than the highly centralized one used by Rome since the IMO counter-reformation, I see little to complain about his sanctity.

That being said, I find the Vespers/Orthros/Liturgy/Paraklesis texts for him rather more polemic than is proper.

 

[Aramis]

re: the part of the OP:

St Mark is not in the official service books of any Orthodox Church AFAIK.

The menaion can be readily changed - it’s the liturgical calendar. And while the liturgy is almost unchanged (each recension has made changes, and a couple of cases, the recension has revision with differences, as well) from church to church, the menaions can vary considerably more.

OrthodoxWiki.org has his troparia and kontakia… which means he’s in someone’s menaion. And is commemorated on Jan. 19.

He’s not in the Ruthenian Menaion, but some pastors have added his commemoration in the litanies and ambon prayer in addition to St. Macarius… but used the propers for St. Macarius alone.

 

[MarkosC]

The menaion can be readily changed - it’s the liturgical calendar. And while the liturgy is almost unchanged (each recension has made changes, and a couple of cases, the recension has revision with differences, as well) from church to church, the menaions can vary considerably more.

OrthodoxWiki.org has his troparia and kontakia… which means he’s in someone’s menaion. And is commemorated on Jan. 19.

He’s not in the Ruthenian Menaion, but some pastors have added his commemoration in the litanies and ambon prayer in addition to St. Macarius… but used the propers for St. Macarius alone.

re: he’s in someone’s menaion -

Not as far as I’m aware. The official books as you mention have St. Macarius in there (analogion.gr/glt/texts/Jan/19.uni.htm, which I believe is a direct digitization of the Apostoliki Diakonia Menaion). Nor am I aware of any divergences in menaia beyond services added for generally local saints.

And yes, an entire Great Vespers/Orthros with Polyeleos/Liturgy and Paraklesis exist for him (translated into English by Holy Transfiguration Monastery), but there are LOTS of such things for saints outside the Menaion, written by qualifeid psaltai in (hopefully) proper Byzantine Greek. The Monasterty of Simonopetra on Mount Athos has an entire bookshelf worth of such services (meaning that they greatly exceed the number in the current official menaion). Such things can be written for any canonized saint (IIRC in St. Mark’s case by his brother, who was also a bishop).

So, just because a service is written to him and because he (like any saint who doesn’t have a service) can be added to the litanies and ambon prayer does not mean that he’s in anyone’s authorized menaion.

That being said, in the case of St. Mark, he is certainly commemorated by AFAIK every Orthodox church and his service (or any other saint’s service) can be said at the discretion of the responsible local ordinary to replace (or to add to) whoever’s in the current official Menaion.