What can Eastern Catholics reject / accept in terms of faith?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Magicsilence
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I also liked what the Catechsim says:
Click to expand...
We have our own Cathechism which explains why we don’t believe in the Western understanding of Original sin and do not believe in mortal/venial sin.
 
LakaYaRabb said:
We don’t believe in mortal sin, so we can’t be in it. 😉
Click to expand...
Hmmm. My Ruthenian Catholic priest does and says to reject such Catholic teachings is to cease to be Catholic. Whether you personally believe in mortal sin or not has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not there is such a thing as mortal sin.
 
It never said that she was physically alive during the Assumption. Nobody knows and It was not very clear that is why the Holy Father phrased it:
Click to expand...
Uh, sorry. Mary died and so did Jesus Christ.
 
East_and_West said:
Eastern Catholics must accept the same teachings that western Catholics are bound to because the faith is ONE. However, they may describe the teachings using different terminolgy to do so. For example, they must believe that mary was concieved without a fallen nature. However, they may use the term “All Holy” to describe this, rather than the term Immaculate Conception. Rember, there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all.
Click to expand...
That was my understanding as well.
 
Woodstock said:
Roman Catholics may believe in Mary’s physical death. That she was spared from death is a pious belief of some, but not dictated by the Church.

I would like to add to the “What can be rejected” discussion that the Roman Catholics allow intercomunion with the Orthodox and they are not required to reject their faith before communing. That means those eastern beliefs which differ from Latin beliefs (papal infallibility, for example) must not put one in mortal sin under the Latin theology. Otherwise, the Orthodox could not commune in a Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Remember that the Latin Church allows for Communing Protestants if they are in the danger of death. That doesn’t mean we don’t view the Protestants as holding to heresies.

It should also be pointed out that an Eastern Orthodox who is going to receive Communion in the Catholic Church is expected to be properly disposed from a Catholic point of view. Most Eastern Orthodox who approach a Catholic minister for Communion do not hold the hard-line against the Papacy that others in their Communion do, so even aside from the matter of culpability they are unlikely to have a stance against the Papacy that would warrant a judgement of mortal sin.

Peace and God bless!
 
East_and_West said:
Hmmm. My Ruthenian Catholic priest does and says to reject such Catholic teachings is to cease to be Catholic. Whether you personally believe in mortal sin or not has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not there is such a thing as mortal sin.
Click to expand...
“There is a sin which is mortal.” – The Bible
 
East_and_West said:
Come now woodstock. Eastern CATHOLICS should know better than to reject CATHOLIC dogma. They are CATHOLIC. However, personally, i don’t think that there should be intercommunion with the EOs until full communion is re-established.
Click to expand...
The Vatican is saying that the post-schism councils were local councils. That means they aren’t binding outside the local Church(es) which convened them.

I read that to say post-schism dogmas are not binding outside the Church(es) which convened the local councils. So Eastern Catholics, like the Orthodox, would not be held to them. This is the direction the Vatican is taking in the Orthodox-Catholic dialogue and the official agreement of the Vatican has been given to this understanding. If it is required, why doesn’t the Vatican know better than to agree to this?
 
That sounds like Bishop Samra coming through that post, except I think he reversed the statement from what I recall. Jesus died therefore Mary died.
Click to expand...
Been to any Byzantine Spirituality conferences lately?
 
Hmmm. My Ruthenian Catholic priest does and says to reject such Catholic teachings is to cease to be Catholic. Whether you personally believe in mortal sin or not has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not there is such a thing as mortal sin.
Click to expand...
One Byzantine Catholic priest vs. The Melkite Church, it’s Patriarch and Bishops. I’m Melkite, so I think i’ll go with them, thanks.
 
Well, it is th duty of Western Christians to inform themselves of the traditions of the East. Read Orientale Lumen.
 
Although I am still smarting from the swift execution of the old forum, Yeshua’s new thread raises the perennial question of what exactly an Eastern Catholic may reject / accept in terms of faith.
Click to expand...
If an Eastern Catholic is true to his tradition, this entails understanding spirituality and theology according to that tradition.
Can an Eastern Catholic reject papal infallibility? ‘Latin’ views on original sin? Status of Ecumenical Councils? Etc… and remain an Eastern Catholic?
Click to expand...
If an Eastern Catholic does not recognize his own ecclesiology, then he adopts one foreign to his tradition.
On the flip side, can an Eastern Catholic accept all these things and remain an Eastern Catholic?
Click to expand...
Yes, but a latinizaed one. Ironically, de-latinization is championed by the Roman Church.
What is it (if not the above issues) that can validly (and organically) divide the Church into groups? (Direct differences in liturgy aside).
Click to expand...
Peace and God Bless!
Click to expand...
There is one Church and it is the Church of Jesus Christ which is all those Churches in Communion with each other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top