If the Orthodox Churches are considered true churches, than does membership in either the EOC or the RCC matter?

The Saints - and most particularly the Martyrs - are those who have successfully overcome the barriers which schism has erected. Heaven is not a partitioned place.

As to St. Gregory Palamas, to the best of my knowledge the Holy See has never required anyone to stop venerating him. Most Byzantine Catholics did stop, more or less spontaneously - he managed to survive, so to speak, among the Hungarian Greek-Catholics (and can be found in their older printed manuals of services and prayers); the reason for this could possibly be that they simply did not know who he was (when ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise).

Shortly after Vatican II the Oriental Congregation embarked upon a major publishing project, which resulted in the 4-volume Greek Anthologion; it's a beautiful book and has been a major success (at least two of the volumes are sold out). This raised anew the question of Saint Gregory. The then Prefect of the Oriental Congregation did not know what to do, so he referred the matter to Cardinal Seper at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Cardinal Seper in turn referred the question to Cardinal Slipyj, since Patriarch Joseph was resident in Rome and therefore available, had an outstandingly good theological education, and was not about to do anything which would compromise the Holy See.

Rather to everyone's surprise, Patriarch Joseph responded with a well-written 200-page Votum, analyzing the question from a theological and ecclesiological standpoint, quoting the various experts on Saint Gregory as well as the Saints own writings, and concluded strongly that it was necessary to include Saint Gregory in the Anthologion and restore him to honor and veneration among Greek-Catholics. That satisfied Cardinal Seper, who notified the Oriental Congregation, which acted accordingly, including Saint Gregory in the Anthologion on the Second Sunday of Great Lent. Meanwhile, the Holy Synod of the Greek-Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch had already taken the same decision.

This was in the early seventies. A good twenty years later, I was startled to find that a friend of mine who had been at seminary in Rome at the time and holds a doctorate in canon law from one of the Roman faculties - and is himself a Greek-Catholic priest - was utterly unaware of all this, and refused to believe it when I mentioned it. So I produced the book. My friend was completely shocked, but obviously could not deny the evidence of his eyes, and realized that I could not possibly have printed an entire book in Greek just for a practical joke.

N.B. - it has happened in some cases that certain Saints have been abused as "flag-wavers of anti-Catholicism", so to speak. Venerating these Saints (Saint Photius of Constantinople is an obvious case in point) does not mean using liturgical texts which are in themselves objectionable. There is nothing to prevent the Eastern Catholics from writing more appropriate services in such cases, even as one might excise egregiously anti-Jewish expressions from certain services (that does not mean passing judgement on our Holy Fathers; we assume that they were prudent in their time and that we should be prudent in our time).

In recent times, the Holy See has on several occasions sent official delegations to Orthodox canonizations, which would seem to imply that the Holy See is recognizing the propriety of such canonizations.

Fr. Serge

Fr. Serge, thank you for your thorough reply.

Do you know if Cardinal Slipyj's Votum has been translated into English?

How does it follow that by sending delegates to Orthodox canonizations the RC Church approves of them? One would not say that the MP was approving of VII just because they sent delegates to it (in exchange for the scandalous concessions of the Vatican-Moscow Agreement).

Any resources, preferably online, which you know of concerning Gregory Palamas place in the veneration of ECs I would love to access. If they exist, & if it is convenient, please give me a couple of useful links.

In Christ,
Raymond

Along the lines of Sayenda Zoghby and His Beatitude Ignatios, when formal re-unification happens we must find an way to speak of the Church which honors and does not repudiate or break from the past for both East and West.

As a Melkite, I can tell you Saint Gregory Palamas is venerated in the Eastern Churches. I have a devotion to Saint Gregory Palamas. I had an icon written for a friend of mine by a monk of St Isaac of Syria skete of Saint Gregory of Palamas.

Our Menaion has post-schism saints included. The second Sunday of the Great Fast commemorated Saint Gregory Palamas.

StJosaphatKuncevyc,

Hope this helps:
Saint Gregory Palamas

May God Bless you!

Raymond asks me for resources concerning Eastern Catholic veneration of Saint Gregory Palamas. I don't specifically know of anything on line. If you can check actual printed books, his service is, as I mentioned, included in the Anthologion published by the Holy See for Greek-Catholic use. There is an English translation of this service in the Uniontown edition of the Lenten Triodion - and a better translation in the Triodion of Bishop Kallistos and Mother Mary.

Raymond also asks ?

The cases are not parallel - first, there is no secular government coercing Rome into sending representatives to Orthodox canonizations. Second, why would Rome send representatives - particularly bishops - to a canonization if Rome did not care to recognize the canonization?

As to the specific case of Father Alexis Toth - Rome sent no representative; a Greek-Catholic friend who was informally present came away badly traumatized by the several unabashed attacks on the Greek-Catholic Church which were voiced in the course of the proceedings. Further to that case, the canonization was not prepared by any movement of prayer, which is normally considered an essential part of the process.

This is not to say that Father Alexis is not among the Saints - nobody has purported to damn him! He found himself trapped in an impossible situation in Minneapolis, thanks to the misconduct of Archbishop John Ireland, and Bishop Vladimir offered a path of normal Church life. Just what else could Father Alexis have done? He knew very well that a parish without a bishop, floating in an ecclesiastical equivalent of cyber-space, is a hopeless freak that offers nothing. So it would be accurate to say of Father Alexis that in the worst of circumstances he did the best that he could; Saints have been canonized for less than that. Incidentally, has the OCA produced a full service for him?

Someone else made a disparging reference to post-Vatican II novelties. Excuse me? Vatican II and more recent documents do not encourage the Eastern Catholic Churches to seek novelties; these documents mandate us to a genuine repristination in the areas of theology, liturgy, spirituality and discipline. That certainly includes an awareness of the ecclesial reality of Eastern Orthodoxy.

But on the specific question of Saints, look at the Church-Slavonic books published in the 1940s by the Holy See; Orthodox Saints will be found therein.

Once more, the Saints have transcended the schism, and they don't have partitions in heaven.

Fr. Serge

Well put. Thank you, Fr. Serge. I am edified by and appreciate reading your informed posts.

In Christ,

Porter

St. Photios was mentioned twice. I want to point out that he was pre-schism. He obviously is most well-known for fighting against the filioque. However, this would not be problematic for ECs. He's on the Byz Cath calendar on February 6.

Not only is St. Photios of Constantinople pre-schism; his canonization took place long before 1054 and Rome never issued any protest. He died in full communion with Rome.

Those who are particularly interested should read Father Francis Dvornik on the subject.

Fr. Serge

Fr. Serge,

Blahoslovy!

Why all the polemics on the Catholic (Roman) side over him if he was Canonized?

Dr. Eric

MY understanding is that Pope John Paul the Great inserted Gregory Palamas into our Byzantine Calendars (in the 1990's I believe)- much to the chagrin of one of my ultramontanist friends. I know that the process of a Pople doing so is traditionally Orthodox, but I am nonetheless very glad JP II did so, as I love Gregory.

Also, my understanding is that the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Church venerates Paul Godjich, Theodore Romzha and Basil Hopko, even though they were Greek Catholics. They are venerated as Rusyn Martyrs.

The Blessing of the Lord!

Dr. Eric asks:

Several reasons: most important was the growth of what turned out to be an entirely-too-potent legend about the poor man. Again, the best study of the subject is Francis Dvornik's book, which is essential reading. It's also interesting reading, though Dvornik's footnotes can be intimidating.

Fr. Serge

My very brief allusion to 'post-VII novelties' was not an accusation against any specific thing identified as novel. As for the novel nature of VII & post-VII activities, if allowing non-Catholic Orthodox to partake of the Holy Mysteries is not a novelty, I don't know what is.



Why would Eastern Orthodox folk show up at the Council of Trent? Not to approve it, certainly. Why does the United States government send ambassadors to Iran? Not to recognize the legitimacy of that government's activities, of a surety.

Are you of the understanding that any saint at which a Vatican representative is present is fair game for our veneration?

To change the subject somewhat...

I read somewhere that in 1940 Pope Pius XII of blessed memory issued a liturgical calendar for Russian Catholic use which included post-schism Russian saints, among them St. Sergius of Radonezh. Knows anyone of the other saints whose veneration was sanctioned by that calendar?