Another Reason We Should Convert The Orthodox

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1895018' date='Jun 18 2009, 12:55 AM']I didn't know that you were planning on entering the seminary. [/quote]
Don't know where I put the rest of that sentence - in my discernment of my vocation to Christ's Church.

Not that the thought of the priesthood hasn't crossed my mind...
But that is certainly a discussion for another time.

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1894593' date='Jun 17 2009, 05:07 PM']The [i]validity[/i] of the sacrament of penance is not affected by faculties and mandates. Such things are a matter of obedience, and should be followed, but they do not take away the power of a priest with Apostolic Succession (as the Orthodox have) to minister the sacrament.
(Whether a sacrament is valid, and whether it is licit are two separate issues.)

Every orthodox (small "o") Catholic source I could find on the topic says that the Eastern Orthodox do in fact have valid sacraments, including Confession/Penance.
Canon Law acknowledges this in Canon 844, when it states that Catholics may receive the sacraments from non-Catholic ministers in an emergency situation:
This refers to Orthodox and other schismatic Churches who have valid apostolic succession, and valid sacraments.

The idea that the Eastern Orthodox do not have a valid sacrament of penance is your own opinion, not that of the Catholic Church.
Only the Church can speak authoritatively as to what sacraments are and aren't valid, not Jake from Phatmass.[/quote]

Sorry, for a confession to be valid the priest requires jurisdiction which he can only acquire by a mandate from his local bishop (or religious superior). It's not the same as the Eucharist or baptism. [b]That's why SSPX Mass's are considered illicit but their confessions are considered both illicit AND invalid.[/b]
Absolution is an act that is not only sacramental but also authorative. Thus it requires jurisdiction, which the Orthodox lack. Have a look at the canon law that Resurrexi posted.

[i]Canon Law acknowledges this in Canon 844, when it states that Catholics may receive the sacraments from non-Catholic ministers in an emergency situation:[/i]
That's kind of a distortion. In cases of emergency the Church supplies jurisdiction where it's usually not present, it's called Epikia. It's very different from ordinary penance in an Orthodox Church.


[i]
Only the Church can speak authoritatively as to what sacraments are and aren't valid, not Jake from Phatmass.[/i]
No need to get snarky.

Edited June 18, 2009 by OraProMe

[LouisvilleFan]

Yay... another boring thread.

[Gregorius]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1893763' date='Jun 16 2009, 08:33 PM']Those are great readings suggestions for information on Eastern Christianity. I would add some good Catholic (Eastern) authors to that list:

Francis Dvornik, Fr. George Maloney, and Khaled Anatolios

I would also recommend the following Orthodox authors:

Vladimir Lossky, Fr. Georges Florovsky, Fr. John Behr, and Ambrosios Giakalis (to name just a few).

Those interested in getting a taste of the writings of Fr. Meyendorff can read excerpts from his book entitled "Byzantine Theology", which is posted online at the link below:

[url="http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/byzantine_theology_j_meyendorf.htm"][b][u]Byzantine Theology[/u][/b][/url][/quote]
Thanks guys!

[Gregorius]

[quote name='OraProMe' post='1895136' date='Jun 18 2009, 07:44 AM']Sorry, for a confession to be valid the priest requires jurisdiction which he can only acquire by a mandate from his local bishop (or religious superior). It's not the same as the Eucharist or baptism. [b]That's why SSPX Mass's are considered illicit but their confessions are considered both illicit AND invalid.[/b]
Absolution is an act that is not only sacramental but also authorative. Thus it requires jurisdiction, which the Orthodox lack. Have a look at the canon law that Resurrexi posted.

[i]Canon Law acknowledges this in Canon 844, when it states that Catholics may receive the sacraments from non-Catholic ministers in an emergency situation:[/i]
That's kind of a distortion. In cases of emergency the Church supplies jurisdiction where it's usually not present, it's called Epikia. It's very different from ordinary penance in an Orthodox Church.[/quote]
I thought we just got done saying they [u]do[/u] have a valid sacrament because 1) that's what the Church teaches, 2) the Orthodox have Apostolic Succession, and 3) Because they have valid Apostolic Succession, they have a valid Authority, just not our Authority. The SSPX claim to be under our Authority, but as they teach doctrine contrary to our own, as they are under our jurisdiction we have forbidden them to exercise their priestly ministry, making sacraments like penance invalid.
The Orthodox, according to the Church, profess little to no heresy at all. They, like the SSPX, are schismatic (I'm not saying one broke away from the other, I don't wish to start that argument up!), but the difference is that they do not teach error. As they are apart from our jurisdiction but under a valid authority nonetheless, their sacraments are valid!

[LouisvilleFan]

I feel like a mess was made solely for the sake of cleaning it up.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Gregorius' post='1895355' date='Jun 18 2009, 03:37 PM']I thought we just got done saying they [u]do[/u] have a valid sacrament because 1) that's what the Church teaches, 2) the Orthodox have Apostolic Succession, and 3) Because they have valid Apostolic Succession, they have a valid Authority, just not our Authority. The SSPX claim to be under our Authority, but as they teach doctrine contrary to our own, as they are under our jurisdiction we have forbidden them to exercise their priestly ministry, making sacraments like penance invalid.
The Orthodox, according to the Church, profess little to no heresy at all. They, like the SSPX, are schismatic (I'm not saying one broke away from the other, I don't wish to start that argument up!), but the difference is that they do not teach error. As they are apart from our jurisdiction but under a valid authority nonetheless, their sacraments are valid![/quote]

In honesty, the SSPX is more doctrinally orthodox than the Eastern Orthodox Churches are. The SSPX accept all the teachings of the Church up to the 1960s, whereas the Eastern Orthodox Churches only accept the teachings of the Church of Christ up to the 1050s.

[Patrick]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1895474' date='Jun 18 2009, 05:57 PM']In honesty, the SSPX is more doctrinally orthodox than the Eastern Orthodox Churches are. The SSPX accept all the teachings of the Church up to the 1960s, whereas the Eastern Orthodox Churches only accept the teachings of the Church of Christ up to the 1050s.[/quote]

You're using a strange definition of the word "orthodox" then.

[Resurrexi]

I am using orthodox in the sense of "professing Catholic doctrine."

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1895474' date='Jun 18 2009, 05:57 PM']In honesty, the SSPX is more doctrinally orthodox than the Eastern Orthodox Churches are. The SSPX accept all the teachings of the Church up to the 1960s, whereas the Eastern Orthodox Churches only accept the teachings of the Church of Christ up to the 1050s.[/quote]
How can you say that they accept all the teachings up to the 1960s while they are simultaneously in open disobedience to their legitimate patriarch, the bishop of Rome?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1895485' date='Jun 18 2009, 08:10 PM']How can you say that they accept all the teachings up to the 1960s while they are simultaneously in open disobedience to their legitimate patriarch, the bishop of Rome?[/quote]

Orthodoxy does not always mean orthopraxy (not that the SSPX are completely orthodox).

[Socrates]

[quote name='OraProMe' post='1895136' date='Jun 18 2009, 08:44 AM']Sorry, for a confession to be valid the priest requires jurisdiction which he can only acquire by a mandate from his local bishop (or religious superior). It's not the same as the Eucharist or baptism. [b]That's why SSPX Mass's are considered illicit but their confessions are considered both illicit AND invalid.[/b]
Absolution is an act that is not only sacramental but also authorative. Thus it requires jurisdiction, which the Orthodox lack. Have a look at the canon law that Resurrexi posted.

[i]Canon Law acknowledges this in Canon 844, when it states that Catholics may receive the sacraments from non-Catholic ministers in an emergency situation:[/i]
That's kind of a distortion. In cases of emergency the Church supplies jurisdiction where it's usually not present, it's called Epikia. It's very different from ordinary penance in an Orthodox Church.[/quote]
The only one claiming the Orthodox Sacrament of Penance is invalid is yourself. The Church does not teach that, and you have provided nothing from the Church saying so.

What I posted was not a distortion, but I quoted verbatim from the Canon:[quote]. . . Christ's faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a catholic minister, may lawfully receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick from [b]non-catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.[/b][/quote]
It says that the sacraments in these non-Catholic Churches (obviously referring to Orthodox Churches) [b]are valid[/b].
It doesn't say "they can become valid." And penance is specifically listed among these sacraments.

Unless you can provide something in canon law or official Church teaching stating otherwise, this case is closed.

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1895172' date='Jun 18 2009, 09:58 AM']Yay... another boring thread.[/quote]
Sorry His Royal Highness is not entertained.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Patrick' post='1895479' date='Jun 18 2009, 08:04 PM']You're using a strange definition of the word "orthodox" then.[/quote]
Can one be more orthodox than the Orthodox?

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1895665' date='Jun 19 2009, 12:16 AM']The only one claiming the Orthodox Sacrament of Penance is invalid is yourself. The Church does not teach that, and you have provided nothing from the Church saying so.

What I posted was not a distortion, but I quoted verbatim from the Canon:
It says that the sacraments in these non-Catholic Churches (obviously referring to Orthodox Churches) [b]are valid[/b].
It doesn't say "they can become valid." And penance is specifically listed among these sacraments.

Unless you can provide something in canon law or official Church teaching stating otherwise, this case is closed.[/quote]
Pleaseeeeeeeeeeeee man, stop with the attitude.

Canon 966 - §1. [b]For the valid absolution of sins it is required that,
besides the power received through sacred ordination,[/b] the minister
possess the[b] faculty [/b]to exercise that power over the faithful to whom
he imparts absolution.
§2. A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself or by a
concession granted by [b]competent authority[/b] in accord with the norm
of canon 969.
Canon 969 - §1. [b]The local ordinary alone is competent to confer upon
any presbyters whatsoever the faculty to hear the confession of any
of the faithful[/b]; however, presbyters who are members of religious
institutes should not use such

Edited June 19, 2009 by OraProMe

[Gregorius]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1895668' date='Jun 19 2009, 12:17 AM']Can one be more orthodox than the Orthodox? [/quote]
Of course, by joining the Catholic Church!

Edited June 19, 2009 by Gregorius