What is the Orthodox opinion of the Catholic Church?

[Jolly_Joe]

Going back to the original question, I don’t know if one can completely count all of Orthodoxy as completely monolithic concerning the question but in general, I believe it would be accurate to say that the RCC is viewed as a schismatic group who followed one bishop in breaking away from the one catholic and apostolic church.

JJ

 

[Gene_Church]

I stated:
You stated I don’t see how you could possibly take my statement as bad manners.

The questions are asked here a lot, but I have to wonder why.

What could you possibly care what Orthodox think of your sacraments or your church or anything else? We really don’t have a formal opinion about your church because your church is not our church.

And we know our sacraments are valid, we know our teachings are true. We don’t need Lutherans or Baptists or Latin Catholics to tell us this. We just don’t.

We cannot commune with you and our priests cannot concelebrate. This is directly related to a difference in teachings, Orthodox don’t teach some of the things your church does. That’s all we know.

Sorry to hurt your feelings, it was not intended to. But we don’t bring the subject up. The question is always the same and the answer does not change.

Thankfully, this guy can only speak for himself, not the orthodox church. A problem though, is who speaks for the Orthodox? At least with the Catholic Church, that isn’t a problem.

 

[Hesychios]

Interesting that some on this thread, with 5000+ posts, claim to not care about what Catholics think. I suppose they are here merely to proclaim their own superiority then.

Very transparent to an outsider…

You don’t understand.

It’s not personal.

That is the only possible response.

If you were to read comments from Anglicans stating you “don’t care” about them because their orders are not valid how would you respond? If you saw a Latin Catholic respond to an Anglican “well, the church says you have invalid orders, but personally I think you your orders are just as valid” how would you react to that? Wouldn’t you say “YOU DON’T SPEAK FOR THE CHURCH…YOU ARE CONFUSING THE SUBJECT…WHO MADE YOU POPE?” or something to that effect, and pull out all kinds of evidence to refute them?

It’s out of our hands. You have to understand that Orthodox do not and can not see this the same way you do…

We don’t make distinctions like “Valid, but Illicit” and things like that. We just cannot know, therefore it is an amazement that you would care what we think. It would be a surprise if we cared what you think.

On a personal level, it can be a different story altogether, as Isa explains. But when someone asks what “Orthodox” think it has to be answered this way.

What we “think” is that your church teaches things Orthodoxy does not teach, and that needs to be fixed before we can say anything else.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

There are many different Orthodox churches, some Acknowledge Rome, others may or may not, even acknowledge one another- I perfectly understand the sentiment of the Eastern posters- it is true, except with grave cause- the validity of our sacraments don’t counts to them. To us, yes- they are valid, and too my knowledge, they do not deny our Succession, so ours are valid to them in general.

Just as doubtable baptisms can be performed, so can they attend us at death- I would presume, and it seems that they call us Ecclesium, and not ecclesiastical community- so we are valid- thank you for verifying it dear eastern brothers. P.S. The coptics also recognise our sacraments if I am correct, and these groups don’t recognise Anglican sacraments or other groups.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Thankfully, this guy can only speak for himself, not the orthodox church. A problem though, is who speaks for the Orthodox? At least with the Catholic Church, that isn’t a problem.

Oh? How well did Vatican II go down? And then the "motu proprio"s afterwards?

It’s not a problem with the question at hand, because you’re not going to get a different answer (except maybe a more negative one) no matter which Orthodox you ask.

 

[Peter_J]

And while we Catholics and Orthodox do remain ‘saveable’ in each others’ eyes (and very much closer in most doctrinal issues than Catholics/Protestants and Orthodox/ Protestants), the split has been twice as long as the Protestant split, and thus the wounds, while longer ‘healing’, run deeper.

Yes. Three times as long, in fact, with respect to the Oriental Orthodox.

 

[Peter_J]

Actually, AtPeace’s profile says “unaffiliated” for Religion.

You don’t understand.

It’s not personal.

That is the only possible response.

If you were to read comments from Anglicans stating you “don’t care” about them because their orders are not valid how would you respond? If you saw a Latin Catholic respond to an Anglican “well, the church says you have invalid orders, but personally I think you your orders are just as valid” how would you react to that? Wouldn’t you say “YOU DON’T SPEAK FOR THE CHURCH…YOU ARE CONFUSING THE SUBJECT…WHO MADE YOU POPE?” or something to that effect, and pull out all kinds of evidence to refute them?

It’s out of our hands. You have to understand that Orthodox do not and can not see this the same way you do…

We don’t make distinctions like “Valid, but Illicit” and things like that. We just cannot know, therefore it is an amazement that you would care what we think. It would be a surprise if we cared what you think.

On a personal level, it can be a different story altogether, as Isa explains. But when someone asks what “Orthodox” think it has to be answered this way.

What we “think” is that your church teaches things Orthodoxy does not teach, and that needs to be fixed before we can say anything else.

 

[Peter_J]

Why?

To the answers already given, I would add that a major reason (I think) is that we ourselves have done so, at least in some cases. In particular:

1. The Catholic Church has decided that the Orthodox, Assyrians, and PNCC do have valid sacraments – even going so far as to permit Catholics to request the Eucharist from an Orthodox, Assyrian, or PNCC priest under certain circumstances. (Of course, this is really a moot point in the case of the Orthodox, since they wouldn’t allow us to receive.)
2. The Catholic Church has decided that the Anglicans do not have valid orders (except sometimes via non-Anglican ordination, e.g. Old Catholics) – even going so far as to make this a mandatory belief for all Catholics.

One caveat I’d like to add is that #2 might never have happened if the current ecumenical atmosphere had existed at the time.

 

[Wyatt]

Oh dear…I didn’t want to stir up a heated debate on the subject. I thought there could be a definite answer as to what the Orthodox Church teaches as far as the validity of Catholic sacraments…I figured it would be a simple “yes” or “no” type response.

I personally am a former Protestant of 18 years who converted to Catholicism Easter Vigil of 2007.

Thankfully, this guy can only speak for himself, not the orthodox church. A problem though, is who speaks for the Orthodox? At least with the Catholic Church, that isn’t a problem.

This is what I was wondering…what the official opinion of the Orthodox Church was regarding the validity of Catholic sacraments. So far no one has answered that definitively,

Oh? How well did Vatican II go down? And then the "motu proprio"s afterwards?

It’s not a problem with the question at hand, because you’re not going to get a different answer (except maybe a more negative one) no matter which Orthodox you ask.

What is the official answer of the Orthodox Church, though? That’s what I was asking, not the individual opinions of the Orthodox, but what the Orthodox Church as a whole holds and professes to be true.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

This is what I was wondering…what the official opinion of the Orthodox Church was regarding the validity of Catholic sacraments. So far no one has answered that definitively,

What is the official answer of the Orthodox Church, though? That’s what I was asking, not the individual opinions of the Orthodox, but what the Orthodox Church as a whole holds and professes to be true.

From what I gather either there is not an official stance from the various Orthodox churches. or if there is those on this forum do not know what is is. I to would loke to know what it is if there is one.

 

[Peter_J]

Oh dear…I didn’t want to stir up a heated debate on the subject.

Glad to hear it.

I thought there could be a definite answer as to what the Orthodox Church teaches as far as the validity of Catholic sacraments…I figured it would be a simple “yes” or “no” type response.

I personally am a former Protestant of 18 years who converted to Catholicism Easter Vigil of 2007.

This is what I was wondering…what the official opinion of the Orthodox Church was regarding the validity of Catholic sacraments. So far no one has answered that definitively,

What is the official answer of the Orthodox Church, though? That’s what I was asking, not the individual opinions of the Orthodox, but what the Orthodox Church as a whole holds and professes to be true.

I find it strange that you’re criticizing the Orthodox for not having an “official opinion” on the validity of Catholic sacraments, when in fact Apostolicae Curae (the Catholic bull which required all Catholics to agree that Anglican orders are invalid) wasn’t issued until 1896 – that is to say, there were centuries during which Catholics were permitted to believe that Anglican orders were either valid or invalid.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Oh dear…I didn’t want to stir up a heated debate on the subject. I thought there could be a definite answer as to what the Orthodox Church teaches as far as the validity of Catholic sacraments…I figured it would be a simple “yes” or “no” type response.

I personally am a former Protestant of 18 years who converted to Catholicism Easter Vigil of 2007.

This is what I was wondering…what the official opinion of the Orthodox Church was regarding the validity of Catholic sacraments. So far no one has answered that definitively,

What is the official answer of the Orthodox Church, though? That’s what I was asking, not the individual opinions of the Orthodox, but what the Orthodox Church as a whole holds and professes to be true.

Oh? How well did Vatican II go down? And then the "motu proprio"s afterwards?

It’s not a problem with the question at hand, because you’re not going to get a different answer (except maybe a more negative one) no matter which Orthodox you ask.

From what I gather either there is not an official stance from the various Orthodox churches. or if there is those on this forum do not know what is is. I to would loke to know what it is if there is one.

There is an offiicial stance from the ONE Orthodox Church.

We do know it.

The Orthodox Church does not comment, regulate, validate, approve, etc. Holy Mysteries/Sacraments outside of visiblbe communion iwth the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

(those of you who accuse us Orthodox of making up the image of the Vatican regulating and codifying everything, TAKE NOTE!).

Now, when someone comes to enter into communion with Our Church, it then becomes an issue of economia, which, by its nature, is a case by case basis.

To give an analogy, in Illinoiis law (and I’m guessing elsewhere) the Appellate Court must FIRST determine if its jurisdiction has been properly invoked, curing any defect in jurisdiction or dismiss for want of jurisdiction, BEFORE IT DOES ANYTHING. It is not allowed to go on to say, “if this case was properly before us we would…”

Now with the Oriental Orthodox we have agreements on their Holy Mysteries, etc. because we are entering into intercommunion.

If the Vatican reaches, God grant!, a similar point, we will have similar positions.

Until then, the official and universal position of the Orthodox Church will remain “No comment.”

If you do not like the answer, we stick to the Lord’s word on it. Take it up with Him. Mark 9:38-41

 

[Inity]

Russian Orthodox Church believes that Catholic Church has valid Apostolic succession. If a catholic priest decides to join Russian Orthodox Church, he will be accepted as a priest. No re-ordination.
The baptizm is also considered to be valid. I don’t remember the statement of the marriage - but most likely, they accept it to be valid. They accept civil unions to be valid marriages, just not “blessed” by Holy Spirit; so orthodox persons who are only married according to civil laws, are not considered to be sinning.

The tough question is the Eucharist. The Orthodox Church just avoids the answer now.
Many russian orthodox people believe that catholics are heretics (though Russian Orthodox Church never officially claimed that) and so, come up with saying “Communion of Heretics is food of daemons”.
I’ve always been wondering, when I was Russian Orthodox, why, if we accept Holy Orders, we don’t want to accept the Eucharist.
And, in 1960’s-1970’s, for really short period of time, it was allowed for russian orthodox christians in some circumstances, (such as danger of death & no orthodox priest nearby), to accept Catholic Communion. So, actually, they were accepting the validity of Catholic Eucharist! But now, this practice is “put on hold and not active”, as official statements of Moscow Patriarchy says. Now, receiving catholic Communion by orthodox people is prohibited. Though I know some people who were receiving catholic communion, still being orthodox. It was their own decision.
For me, the denial of catholic sacraments was a sin. I even went to confession to catholic priest in 1996 (still being orthodox), confessing my “non-belief” against the Catholic Church and validity of its Sacraments.
In 2005, I received catholic Communion - it was my own and deep wish - and shortly after that, I joined the Catholic Church.

 

[Harmony1988]

Why?

Why?

If your baptism is valid? We still won’t be baptized by you.

If your chrismation is valid? We still won’t accpet it from you.

If your priesthood is valid? Our bishops still will not let them serve at their altars.

If your Eucharist is valid? We still won’t commune with you.

If your marriages are valid? We still won’t marry in your churches.

If your unction is valid? We still won’t call you when the time comes.

I personally do, and prostrate whenever I come into a Latin church where adoration is goiing on, and cross myself passing a Latin church.

But that’s just my own theologoumen, and I’d never commune at a Latin church.

Why?

Erring, but salvageable/saveable.

A perfect example of actually not reading the original question properly. Take note everyone.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Russian Orthodox Church believes that Catholic Church has valid Apostolic succession. If a catholic priest decides to join Russian Orthodox Church, he will be accepted as a priest. No re-ordination.
The baptizm is also considered to be valid. I don’t remember the statement of the marriage - but most likely, they accept it to be valid. They accept civil unions to be valid marriages, just not “blessed” by Holy Spirit; so orthodox persons who are only married according to civil laws, are not considered to be sinning.

You have this reversed. It is an automatic excommuication.

Btw, have you joined the “Russian Catholic” rite, or Latin?

 

[Harmony1988]

It seems people have difficult answering simple questions. Of course if you don’t want to answer it, then it’s one thing, but then one would wonder why you would post your opinion of “i don’t care” when you could have just not posted, one would think it’s quite something else.

 

[Harmony1988]

Well in answer to the OP:

catholicexchange.com/2007/03/31/83688/

So it’s generally a no I believe, however orthodox are allowed to participate in some of the sacraments in the catholic church.

Plus I believe that orthodox theologians or most anyways recognize the apostolic succession of catholic bishops.

 

[Inity]

About the civil marriage:
there is official definition of Russian Orthodox Synod (28.12.1998), signed by Alexiy II (russian text is here -
wco.ru/biblio/books/sinod1/Main.htm ). It says, between other statements, that “Church respects civil unions” and that priests cannot claim civil unions between orthodox people to be invalid; it blames priests who deny Communion to these people, and who claim “civil unions” to be adultery.
(By “civil union” I mean officially registered marriage - according to state laws. Though Russian Orthodox Church encourages people to marry in the Church, it doesn’t deny communion to those who are married only civilly.)

I joined Latin Rite. Though I respect Eastern liturgical traditions, I always liked the latin rite Mass. And, deciding to join Catholic Church, I wanted to be in Latin Rite. Besides that, there are (as far as I know) no Eastern Rite churches in St.Petersburg; there are 7 Latin Rite ones (in Moscow, there are only two - so Petersburg is “more catholic” city than Moscow 8)

 

[Harmony1988]

About the civil marriage:
there is official definition of Russian Orthodox Synod (28.12.1998), signed by Alexiy II (russian text is here -
wco.ru/biblio/books/sinod1/Main.htm ). It says, between other statements, that “Church respects civil unions” and that priests cannot claim civil unions between orthodox people to be invalid; it blames priests who deny Communion to these people, and who claim “civil unions” to be adultery.
(By “civil union” I mean officially registered marriage - according to state laws. Though Russian Orthodox Church encourages people to marry in the Church, it doesn’t deny communion to those who are married only civilly.)

I joined Latin Rite. Though I respect Eastern liturgical traditions, I always liked the latin rite Mass. And, deciding to join Catholic Church, I wanted to be in Latin Rite. Besides that, there are (as far as I know) no Eastern Rite churches in St.Petersburg; there are 7 Latin Rite ones (in Moscow, there are only two - so Petersburg is “more catholic” city than Moscow 8)

But this we have known, even from the Bible…
Being unequally yoked is STRONGLY discouraged, but, it’s still valid and not condemned. How about communion, is that recognized by the Russian Orthodox Church? As in, can Catholics received communion in the russian orthodox churches?

 

[Inity]

First of all, I’ve heard about one famous priest (can’t come up with his name right now) who was giving communion to catholics during the World War II.
There’s no official statement, as far as I know, about letting catholics to receive Communion. So it’s up for a priest to decide.

I personally know a catholic girl who received Communion in Russian Orthodox Church. It was in 1993, she was from group of Polish Catholics who came to St.Petersburg. I was their “guide”, and I invited her to visit the Divine Liturgy together with me.
She wanted to take Communion and went to the line. In Russian Orthodox Church, when you come up to receive Communion, you should say your name. She said “Renata”. It is not an orthodox saint name. The priest asked her “Is it your baptismal name?” She said “Yes”, and then he gave her the Communion.
Sometimes priests also ask “have you been at confession?”, because it’s general rule that you have to go to confession right before taking the Communion (she knew that rule, and she confessed to catholic priest before going to Liturgy with me).