The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Laetitia22, FrAnthony, Kmon23, ServusMariæ, Joe (dcn)
5,968 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 246 guests, and 99 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,380
Posts416,688
Members5,968
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 28
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 28
Originally Posted by Fr. Deacon Lance
Originally Posted by ajk
You are focusing on the wrong words. I made my case in some detail.

And for all that detail I don’t buy it.
Your prerogative: It is my detailed post versus your "I don’t buy it." Also, synod is borrowed from the Greek for council. So in the letter -- and it's a letter not a solemn address by contrast -- we find there are numerous contextual references to Lyons as an ecumenical council in the original Latin text on the Vatican website, for example:
Quote
The whole work of the Council of Lyons is summed up in several Constitutions, ... another, beginning with the word Faithful [Fideli], established the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son as from one principle (Cf. decrees of the ecumenical councils _.., pp. 309 and 314); the others, on the other hand, look at various questions of ecclesiastical discipline. But if we evaluate the importance of this Council and its fruits, which have also been perceived through the consequent centuries, not only in regard to discipline, but also in the religious life of the Christian people, this is mainly due to its canonical work, which achieved great authority in the Church (Const. 26, 27, 28 and 19, cf.Decrees of ecumenical councils, pp. 328-330; 324).

Originally Posted by Fr. Deacon Lance
Originally Posted by ajk
Didn't think I'd have to compare it to a Pope's formal address opening the Council; it's a matter of relative proportion. But, if you insist: Sincere statement, poor ecclesiology, rejected by both Catholic and Orthodox communions.
Yet still held by the Melkite Synod. So claims that one view represents the “Eastern Catholic” view are false. Not everyone is in agreement.
What exactly is it that is oficially "held" by the Melkite Synod?

Originally Posted by Fr. Deacon Lance
Originally Posted by ajk
Was Vatican II an Ecumenical Council or was it not?
I believe it was. But it also wasn’t dealing with heresy or proclaiming dogma so its relevance to the Orthodox is negligible.
It may not be relevant to the Orthodox but that is NOT the question or the point. Returning to it:

Originally Posted by ajk
The Catholic Church -- that is THE CATHOLIC CHURCH not just the western Catholic Church -- officially, formally, recognizes 21 Ecumenical Councils.
So if VCII is an ecumenical council as you believe it is, how many ecumenical councils are recognized as such by "THE CATHOLIC CHURCH"?

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 64
Likes: 3
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 64
Likes: 3
I hedge my bets and venerate all the saints, East and West. I need all the help I can get.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
If I may cut through a lot of the verbiage, and, sadly, some of the bad feelings that have been expended on this thread, I'd like to offer this quote from The Catechism of the Catholic Church that doesn't say it all, but says a lot: "With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."

Add to this the fact that Saint Gregory of Narek (Grigor Narekatsi) of the ancient Armenian Apostolic Church (long seperated from Rome and Constantinople) was made a Doctor of the Church by the Bishop of Rome, Papa Francesco, on Febrruary 26, 2015. May St. Gregory pray for us all! Enough said.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
Originally Posted by Utroque
If I may cut through a lot of the verbiage, and, sadly, some of the bad feelings that have been expended on this thread, I'd like to offer this quote from The Catechism of the Catholic Church that doesn't say it all, but says a lot: "With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."

Add to this the fact that Saint Gregory of Narek (Grigor Narekatsi) of the ancient Armenian Apostolic Church (long seperated from Rome and Constantinople) was made a Doctor of the Church by the Bishop of Rome, Papa Francesco, on Febrruary 26, 2015. May St. Gregory pray for us all! Enough said.

This previous post of mine ended up as a blank page; perhaps this will correct that. smile

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 28
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 28
Originally Posted by Utroque
If I may cut through a lot of the verbiage, and, sadly, some of the bad feelings that have been expended on this thread, I'd like to offer this quote from The Catechism of the Catholic Church that doesn't say it all, but says a lot: "With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."
The words in quotes are from Pope Paul VI in 1975; it is now 2023. Do the Orthodox reciprocate the sentiment?

Originally Posted by Utroque
Add to this the fact that Saint Gregory of Narek (Grigor Narekatsi) of the ancient Armenian Apostolic Church (long seperated from Rome and Constantinople) was made a Doctor of the Church by the Bishop of Rome, Papa Francesco, on Febrruary 26, 2015. May St. Gregory pray for us all! Enough said.
Is this to be understood as a general endorsement of the veneration of Armenian saints? Do the Armenians reciprocate? What's the Orthodox position?

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
Originally Posted by ajk
The words in quotes are from Pope Paul VI in 1975; it is now 2023. Do the Orthodox reciprocate the sentiment?

Is this to be understood as a general endorsement of the veneration of Armenian saints? Do the Armenians reciprocate? What's the Orthodox position?

Yes, the words are from Pope Paul VI in 1975, but they are incorporated into a catachism that I believe still reflects the official position of the Church of Rome and those Churches in communion with her. Who can speak for the Orthodox? I do feel things have moved in the right direction as contacts and gesture have increased over the years.

And, yes, I do feel that Pope Francis' elevation of St. Gregory Narek does constitute a genenral endorsement not only of Armenian saints, but a warm embrace of the Armenian Church. I've always had the impression that the Armenan Apostolic Church has always expressed warm feelings toward Rome even though no formal nechanism for achieving union has been established at this point.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 28
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 28
I was not questioning Pope Paul or the CCC only that, although in 1975 "it lacks little to attain the fullness," it is now 48 years later.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
Originally Posted by ajk
I was not questioning Pope Paul or the CCC only that, although in 1975 "it lacks little to attain the fullness," it is now 48 years later.

And perhaps it will take another 48 years of deep understanding, dialogue, good will, prayer and that little imperative called necessity to pare down those little differences that keep us separated, and bring about that union which all our Saints now enjoy. I have the feeling that the UGCC and the OCU may pave the way; but who knows.

I've felt for many years that the non-Chalcedonian Churches have had a warmer and less hostile attitude toward Rome than the Orthodox, so called; and, perhaps, a union with them may come even sooner. Invoking one anothers Saints is a good start. smile

Joined: Mar 2022
Posts: 109
Likes: 20
H
Member
Offline
Member
H
Joined: Mar 2022
Posts: 109
Likes: 20
Utroque, you wrote:

"And perhaps it will take another 48 years of deep understanding, dialogue, good will, prayer and that little imperative called necessity to pare down those little differences that keep us separated....."[/ quote]

*****What a discriminating and polite way to express that hope.

"......and bring about that union which all our Saints now enjoy." [/ quote]

*****This is especially beautiful.

"I've felt for many years that the non-Chalcedonian Churches have had a warmer and less hostile attitude toward Rome than the Orthodox, so called...." [/quote]

***** Were there ill- feelings about Canon 28 of Chalcedon among Oriental Orthodox toward the Eastern Orthodox? If so, do they yet linger? Rome ( Pope Leo I) rejected that Canon.......I suppose that's a whole other topic, but just wondering.....

Last edited by Hutsul; 02/27/23 10:42 PM.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
Originally Posted by Hutsul
***** Were there ill- feelings about Canon 28 of Chalcedon among Oriental Orthodox toward the Eastern Orthodox? If so, do they yet linger? Rome ( Pope Leo I) rejected that Canon.......I suppose that's a whole other topic, but just wondering.....

I feel quite certain that, for a long time (perhaps since 1 Constantinople in AD 381) the Church of Alexandria felt upstaged and offended by the usurpation by the Church of Constantinople of its second position within what had been a Patriarchal Tetrarchy of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. This resentment was no doubt reinforced with the introduction of Canon 28 and played a role in withdrawing themselves and other churches from Chalcedon in AD 451. Ecclesiastical politics aside, they did reject the dogmatic definition of the Two Natures/One Person, and hence the separation that exist to this day. Pray, Lord, it's time to heal!

A bit off-topic, but akin to the Thread - Saints preserve us!

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
Originally Posted by Utroque
Originally Posted by Hutsul
***** Were there ill- feelings about Canon 28 of Chalcedon among Oriental Orthodox toward the Eastern Orthodox? If so, do they yet linger? Rome ( Pope Leo I) rejected that Canon.......I suppose that's a whole other topic, but just wondering.....

I feel quite certain that, for a long time (perhaps since 1 Constantinople in AD 381) the Church of Alexandria felt upstaged and offended by the usurpation by the Church of Constantinople of its second position within what had been a Patriarchal Tetrarchy of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. This resentment was no doubt reinforced with the introduction of Canon 28 and played a role in withdrawing themselves and other churches from Chalcedon in AD 451. Ecclesiastical politics aside, they did reject the dogmatic definition of the Two Natures/One Person, and hence the separation that exist to this day. Pray, Lord, it's time to heal!

A bit off-topic, but akin to the Thread - Saints preserve us!

I do not know why my previous post (2/28/23) was misplaced by Giovanni1's older post from 2/20/23, but here it is mine again! I hate to think I was being sabotaged. smile

Last edited by Utroque; 03/01/23 06:07 PM.
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,391
Likes: 30
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,391
Likes: 30
Dear Utroque,

The documents of the Eastern Orthodox-Oriental Orthodox Ecumenical Commission make for a fascinating read!

It appears that the Oriental Orthodox have always affirmed that the One Person of Christ is both Divine and Human without intermixture etc.

They have always clung to the Christological formula of St Cyril of Alexandria: "One Divine Nature of God the Word Incarnate."

At one point in the back and forth between the theologians, both sides came to the realization that when the Oriental Orthodox use the term "Nature" or "Physis" they apparently mean "Person!"

The theologians involved in those ecumenical talks were satisfied that both sides affirmed the same Christology using their own terminology. Yes, they rejected Chalcedon but not, apparently, the essentials of Chalcedon. They talked about that as well and came to the conclusion that since their Churches were not represented at Chalcedon and since they accept the theology of Chalcedon as expressed according to their Miaphysite formulation, they wouldn't need to accept that Council upon any future reunion. Methods of reunion were discussed and included a mutual act of the lifting of the anathemas pronounced by both sides against each other's teachers and Saints (including the Oriental Orthodox Saint Dioscoros and Saint Severus of Antioch, St Dydimus the Blind). That was one possible model of an act of reunion. All that would have to be approved by their respective Churches before proceeding any further, of course.

Interestingly, some Eastern Orthodox parishes have been dropping the names of those Oriental teachers from those mentioned in the Sunday of Orthodoxy services . .

I know, for example, Chaldean Catholics who privately venerate . . . Nestorius, Theodore of Mopsuestia and others honoured in the Assyrian Church of the East because they believe there was misunderstanding on both sides with respect to the unity of Christ's Two Natures. There is so much one could say about this here but I will leave it on the level of "Theology Lite" as per my acknowledged style!

A Blessed Great Fast!

Alex

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 133
Likes: 8
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 133
Likes: 8
Dear Alex,

Glad to see that you that seem to have changed your mind about leaving the forum!

May you, and all here, have a Blessed Great Fast!

JM

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,391
Likes: 30
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,391
Likes: 30
I would like to ask for Fr Deacon's AJK's forgiveness and pardon for having given offence and of all of you here too.

Guess it is too late for me to grow up finally at 67 . . .

In answer to the original question of this thread - no, Eastern Catholics do not venerate all the saints canonized by Rome. They could and nothing is stopping them from that, but many of them are just not in the church calendars of Eastern Catholic Churches.

Certainly, all EC Churches acknowledge the canonizations by His Holiness the Pope of Rome to be true canonizations.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 23
Originally Posted by Orthodox Catholic
I would like to ask for Fr Deacon's AJK's forgiveness and pardon for having given offence and of all of you here too.

Guess it is too late for me to grow up finally at 67 . . .

In answer to the original question of this thread - no, Eastern Catholics do not venerate all the saints canonized by Rome. They could and nothing is stopping them from that, but many of them are just not in the church calendars of Eastern Catholic Churches.

Certainly, all EC Churches acknowledge the canonizations by His Holiness the Pope of Rome to be true canonizations.

A Blessed Great Fast, to you!

I hope we would extend this forgiveness to all on the forum; typos and all. I'm on to my 82 year, but I love the give & take of this forum. It's so good to have your voice back; I do miss the old voices of those who've gone elsewhere since I joined 17 years ago.

Your last, simple sentence was the direct, clear and truthful answer to Giovanni's initial query. Whether t's the answer he was seeking, I know not; but it's the truth.

Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Irish Melkite 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2023 (Forum 1998-2023). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5