WetCatechumen said:
LBK said:
WetCatechumen said:
Now, one of the conflicts in Russia is the sending of bishops to administer to the needs of Latin Catholics there. The MP objected on the grounds that it was infringing upon their jurisdiction, and Rome claimed that the bishop was appointed only to minister to the needs of the Latin Catholics. This would indicate that Rome recognizes the local jurisdiction of the MP. Hence, it implies that they have the authority to perform sacraments in their jurisdiction.
That would imply to me that the sacraments of marriage and confession in the Orthodox Church are considered licit for Orthodox Christians in the Catholic view, although as a whole, the state of schism would render the Orthodox Church illicit.
So by this remarkable reasoning, it's possible to be a little bit pregnant. R-i-ight. ??? ???:

:
I intended only to explain the reality of the situation, which is quite contradictory. The Ecumenical Patriarch received the Pope as a fellow bishop. I cite the homily as evidence:
[quote author="His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I"] Truly, particular and wholehearted gratitude fills our hearts toward the loving God, for today, on the festive commemoration of the Apostle founder and protector of this Church, the Divine Liturgy is attended by
His Holiness our brother and bishop of the elder Rome, Pope Benedict XVI, together with his honorable entourage. Once again, we gratefully greet this presence as a blessing from God, as an expression of brotherly love and honor toward our Church, and as evidence of our common desire to continue—in a spirit of love and faithfulness to the Gospel Truth and the common tradition of our Fathers —the unwavering journey toward the restoration of full communion among our Churches, which constitutes His divine will and command. May it be so.
source:
http://www.holytrinityorthodoxchurch.org/load.php?pageid=53
He was acknowledged by one prominent Orthodox Bishop as the bishop of Rome. The Orthodox position, which
I'm led to believe that Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew would espouse, is that all sacraments outside of the Orthodox Church are illicit, to use the Latin term. However, there is a certain recognition of a semblance of legitimacy to Pope Benedict's claim to being the rightful bishop of Rome, even if it is considered technically illicit by the canons.
Of course, there are many who were dismayed by the behavior of His All-Holiness, including the venerable monks of the Holy Mountain. However, clearly, the reality of what is licit and what is illicit is more complex than "the Orthodox Church is outside of the Catholic Church, and therefore all her sacraments are invalid".
An alternate explanation might be that Rome views it as economical to grant jurisdiction for the sacraments to the Eastern Churches not in communion with her, for the salvation of their faithful. I understand that this interpretation is objectionable to those with anti-Papal views.