Do Eastern Rite Catholics venerate Saints of the Latin Rite, such as St. Francis of Assisi or St. Teresa of Avila? I know the Eastern Orthodox do not but since the Eastern Rite Catholic Church does summit to Rome do they also venerate non-Eastern Rite Saints?
There is no such thing as an “Eastern rite” or “Latin rite” saint unless one also believes that there is “Eastern rite” heaven and “Eastern rite” God to spend “Eastern rite” eternity with. In all seriousness, a Church designates the status of a deceased person. If a Church says they are with God they are saint, if the Church declares they are not they’re either in Sheol or Hell (read: Gehenna).
There is a particular danger in saying things like “Eastern rite” saint because it seems that the ritual gives that individual an exclusive condition - perhaps some saints are more frequently venerated in one Church or another but if they are a saint, they have intercessory power regardless of what ritual the Church that most frequently venerates them uses. It is not just a matter of being pedantic because the same situation, when allowed to be used elsewhere, spawns phrases like “Eastern rite” Communion, as though the flesh of Christ given to the Melkite Church is different flesh than that was given to those who use the Ambrosian rite.
Now as for Constantine, generally the Byzantine Churches venerate him but St. Helena was/is venerated in the West as well.
Please know I am not trying to be sarcastic, rude, or disrespectful in anyway. But I hear this a lot. People get caught up on wording way to much. St Paul warns us about this in
1 Tim. 6:4–5; 2 Tim. 2:14. If I’ve offended any you I am sorry. It’s just that I think you knew what I was talking about right?
Oh no, I didn’t mean it like that. The internet is very bad at conveying emotion - I was making a joke [at least with the first sentence], hence why I said “in all seriousness” :p. I was making a point of clarification, no intention to sound like I was rebuking you.
Got ya! I try to be as nice sounding as possible on these threads because I know how it can get misunderstood. I use to post on a message board on catholic-convert.com and there is a guy there that goes by the name Doom who is a HUGE snob and kind of a jerk. And if you disagree with him on anything pop culture related you are wrong and he will let you know why. I swear the guy is like a Catholic Sheldon Cooper.
Do ya’ know, I just registered in order to ask about the veneration of Constantine. I just read in Wikipedia that the Eastern Schismatics consider him, not only a Saint, but equal to the apostles. In the sidebar it mentioned that he was venerated in Eastern Catholicism, but it didn’t give detail in the article. Eastern Catholicism is fully Catholicism, so what status does that leave Constantine for us Latins? Is he a common Saint, a venerable, a blessed, something equivalent, or none of the above? If he isn’t a venerable or a local saint what if anything is to be made of the Byzantine Catholics venerating him? Are they merely imitating the ES veneration of Constantine, or was his veneration from before the schism? If they are merely imitating the schismatics, are they wrong to do so?
The gist of my question is: since Constantine is my brother’s Saint, who is he to me?
I hope you and your brother read up on this great saint considered the founder of the Byzantine Empire, who enacted the Edict of Milan, convened and presided over the first Ecumenical Council, the Council of Nicaea…on and on…
The Feast of Equal of the Apostles and Emperor Constantine with his Mother Helen was yesterday for those on the old calendar, and May 21 for those on the new calendar.
Happy name day for all named Constantine, Constance and Constantina… and Helen, Elaine, Elena, Olena…
Troparion — Tone 8
Having seen the figure of the Cross in the heavens, / and like Paul not having received his call from men, O Lord, / Your apostle among rulers, the Emperor Constantine, / has been set by Your hand as ruler over the Imperial City / that he preserved in peace for many years, / through the prayers of the Theotokos, O only lover of mankind.
Kontakion — Tone 3
Today Constantine and his mother Helen / reveal the precious Cross, / the weapon of the faithful / against their enemies. / For our sakes, it has been shown to be a great sign, and fearsome in battle.
BTW As per the Important Forum Information at the top of the posts here: "Likewise, the use of the terms schismatic or heretic may not be used as generic descriptors for any of the Eastern or Oriental Churches, whether Catholic or Orthodox.
Thank you for your response. I am educated regarding him as a historical personage, but I had never heard of his being recognized as a saint. I assume that if he is licitly venerated in the Eastern catholic church that gives him some standing for the Latin rite. Would I be correct in assuming that his status is equivalent to one of local canonization? I had been specifically informed way back in catechism, when we were learning about the Arian heresy, that he had not been canonized.
Thank you for informing me. Is there a preferred alternative? I would feel disingenuous if I called them orthodox when I believe their Churches are far from it in the vital issue of Petrine Primacy. (and "Eastern Mostly Orthodox is a bit wordy :D)
Unless I missed something, the group you named does not exist. There’s the ACoE (which is not in communion with either Rome, Eastern Orthodoxy, or Oriental Orthodoxy) but if that’s who you mean then I would appreciate it if you called them by their correct name, the Assyrian Church of the East.
I had not really thought about it until you asked, but yes that does work. (Of course, with respect to posting on CAF, I’m sure you could replace “non-Florentine” with “non-Catholic” and still be understood.)
Of course, we are pretty far off-topic, since this thread is about LC and EC – and EO – saints.
What is the problem with referring to them as the Orthodox Churches? By doing so, you are politely calling them by their name, not acknowledging the extent to which they are or are not orthodox, as determined by you, just as when the Orthodox refer to us as Catholics (something I’ve not known Orthodox to refuse to do), by doing so, they are not acknowledging any degree to which they actually believe us to be truly catholic. Also, the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has no problem with calling them Orthodox, so why should the laity?
As I’m sure you are aware, the modern formal canonization process in Rome hasn’t always existed. Many ancient saints widely venerated in the West (even on the universal calendar) were never canonized in the “modern” sense of the word. Local canonizations took place and the cult of these saints organically spread until it became accepted by the whole Church. I would place St. Constantine on the same level as these saints. No, he is not formally venerated by the Latin Church (to my knowledge), but he is formally venerated by the Byzantine Churches, and thus his veneration must be licit in the Catholic Church.
I’ll be interested to hear what Seraphignatius has to say to your question, but I’ll tell you what I think, continuing from my last post. I’d say it depends on the situation. Consider these two statements:
“Catholics believe that non-Florentine apostolic churches have valid sacraments.”
“Catholics believe that Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, the ACoE, and the PNCC have valid sacraments.”
The two sentences are framed a little differently, but I could see saying either one of them – just as I can understand an Orthodox saying “Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists …” or saying “non-Orthodox Christians”.
Good question. I have, I think, known a number of Catholics who had some sort of problem referring to the Orthodox as “the Orthodox” but I’ve never received much in the way of explanation. (I can understand not wanting to call them “the Orthodox Catholic Church”, but that’s beside the point.)
Oh my. This is an interesting can of worms where I sit on Wikipedia. The article on the Eastern Orthodox Church of course states in the opening sentence that it is officially known as the Orthodox Catholic Church. Well, just about everyone you can think of takes issue with that name, Orthodox and Catholic alike. The Orthodox don’t like being called Catholic and the Catholics don’t like “them” using “our” name. LOL. Sorry to tell them that the Orthodox Church has been Catholic just as long as the Catholic Church has been. And no, they can’t delete that name because it is officially claimed and documented thus by Orthodox sources.
The fact of the matter is that the Orthodox are quite polite to willingly accept a moniker that does not foster confusion with the Catholic Church, and we should likewise be polite enough to our separated brethren to allow them the right of self-identification. I am a great proponent of Christian unity, and I believe that it could happen between Catholic and Orthodox, and the first and last step is for the rank-and-file laity to lay aside their petty differences and sniping such as refusing to call them by their correct name.