www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Venerating Converts to Orthodoxy as Saints

My Pastor is an Eastern Catholic and believes in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas, transubstantion, Purgatory, the Immaculate Conception, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Papal Infallibility and Universal Jurisdiction, all ecumenical councils through Vatican II, the profession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son as a single principal, etc.

Dear East and West,

So does my Pastor!

And your point is?

How does this disqualify Palamas from sainthood in the EC Church?

And the fact that there are EC's who are much given to RC theology - that is an "issue" that shows how much work we need to do to fulfill Rome's invitation to us to become fully "Orthodox in union with Rome."

Alex

Oh my. So you want the east and the west to profess two different faith?

Dear East and West,

Not different - but distinct. If they were the same, why bother having EC Particular Churches just for the incense and icons? Besides, if we were all Thomists, we'd have little use for icons and the theology that maintains them.

But St Thomas Aquinas himself has two different versions of the Procession of the Holy Spirit, one for the West and one for the East, as you will know: And from the Son; Through the Son.

And he says both are equally legitimate.

Florence and Brest, as two examples, confirmed that the East already affirmed the true Trinitarian doctrine with "Through the Son" and needed not to include the Filioque.

So I don't know what you mean by "two different faiths."

The two Churches will always be distinct, yet one.

If you are saying that you feel that the Western spirituality is the only way to legitimately express the one Catholic faith, then we will agree to disagree.

And there are many others, Popes, Vatican documents, Saints and the like who disagree with you as well.

We need to become more than simply RC's in Eastern vestments. If we cannot do that, why have the Eastern Churches?

Because their rites resemble the "good old days" of the Tridentine tradition?

Alex

Dear East and West,

Forgive me for overlooking the most obvious point here.

If your Pastor believes what he believes, why is your parish considering honouring St Gregory Palamas this Sunday?

That really is the question.

Alex

According to Orthdoxwiki


http://orthodoxwiki.org/Filioque

you're venerating someone who says your own church has accepted something heretical.

Dear AMM,

Actually, Palamas didn't say that, his Church said that. by the same token, Catholics shouldn't venerate St Seraphim of Sarov or a number of other Orthodox Saints for the same reason.

In addition, RC theology does indeed affirm that there is a sense in which the Filioque can be understood in an heretical way.

And we've been through this before (many times) in terms of Greek vs Latin and the like.

And ultimately, St John Damascene himself affirms that the Filioque is heretical in his De Fide Orthodoxa. Yet, he is a Doctor of the Catholic Church.

Perhaps if the two Churches could stop talking past each other, they might see things in a more conciliar light.

But St Gregory certainly didn't begin the controversy nor was he ever a central figure in it.

If EC's stopped honouring Saints because of the Filioque, our calendars would soon be reduced to St Francis, St Dominic and St Ignatius Loyola and their companions.

From the point of view of Catholic hagiography, none of this disqualifies St Gregory Palamas from public veneration by Catholics, all Catholics, not just EC's, and certainly Pope John Paul II didn't think so.

And neither does Rome who has acknowledged him as a saint since 1973. RC problems with him had to do with Hesychasm as a form of the "Quietist" heresy.

Once that stumbling block got out of the way, there is no problem.

Also, could you provide a specific reference to Palamas where he affirms Rome is heretical?

Alex

St. Constantine is venerated by many churches - he was openly Arian, and viewed the Orthodox-Catholic bishops as heretical.

Point being that just because a saint is recognized as such, doesn't mean his personal theology is complete or the equivalent of 2000+ years of complete Church teaching (Eastern, Western, Oriental, Assyrian).

Dear Michael Thoma,

Your heart is in the right place!

But Constantine only received baptism by Arians on his death-bed.

He was no theologian and certainly never got involved in the Christological controversites of his time.

The sacraments/mysteries he received from the Arian ministers were certainly valid.

Alex

Dr. A,
I just added something while you were adding something and we've apparently overlapped

Excellent point, Dr. Thoma!

I'm always tickled silly whenever I read about Orthodox veneration of St David of Georgia.

He was a Miaphysite and was attacked by the Greek Orthodox theologians of his day as "that putrefaction from Georgia."

Yet there he is on the Orthodox calendar today!

(Don't tell East and West or AMM, but I also venerate St Photios and St Mark of Ephesus too! Let it be our secret!)

Alex

The Orthodoxwiki article doesn't give a specific source. This article says the following


http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8153.asp

There is really no doubt in my mind what his personal opinion would have been.

Two universal Saints I'd like to have around the coffee table in this discussion of Who's Who among Latin, Greek, Assyrian and Oriental would be Mor Ephrem, Deacon of Edessa and Mor Isaac of Nineveh.

Regarding St. Gregory Palamas and Blessed (St.) Augustine - the Church venerates them both. Even among what so-called 'traditionalist' Eastern Orthodox, he is considered "saintly" [orthodoxinfo.com].

The real answer is nobody should be specially commemorating St. Gregory this weekend given that Lent itself is a month away from starting.

Oh dang snap!