The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Galumph, Leon_C, Rocco, Hvizsgyak, P.W.
5,984 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 238 guests, and 46 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
Topics35,389
Posts416,722
Members5,984
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Originally Posted by StuartK
Quote
At the time of its publication there were demurrals from Rome that its ecclesiology was unacceptable. But I have not kept the news clippings.

I've looked and looked, and can find nothing, not even in the archives of Osservatore Romano.
Stuart, many thanks for looking for it. I cannot press the point since I cannot locate evidence.

I see that the Vatican's website introduces the document with a mild caveat: "Thus, the document represents the outcome of the work of a Commission and should not be understood as an official declaration of the Church’s teaching."

Forum members unfamiliar with the document will find it on the Vatican website. It will be of major importance at the next Plenary Session of this International Commission which will open on Cyprus in less than three weeks. Let us pray that God's beneficent Will be done. Ut omnes unum sint.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...i_doc_20071013_documento-ravenna_en.html

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,405
I think the same caveat can and should be added to every document of every "Joint International Commission." Having read the Ravenna document, I can find nothing wrong with it, but until it has been accepted not just by the members of the commission, but by the Church, it is not "an official declaration of the Church's teaching."

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
So, what constitutes "acceptance"? In the case of the Balamond Statement, Pope John Paul II went out of his way to ensure that the Eastern Catholic Churches would accept it (particularly the Romanian Greek Catholic Church, which was very vocal in its opposition), and he also incorporated language from the Statement into his other Encyclicals. Is Balamond "accepted" by the Catholic Church, in your opinion?

If it is, would a similar demonstration of support by Pope Benedict be sufficient to have Ravenna accepted as official Catholic doctrine?

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505

A report from CNEWA on how the Orthodox Churches reacted to Balamand.

http://www.cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg-us.aspx?eccpageID=82&IndexView=alpha

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
And yet the despised Uniates finally get to participate in the meetings of the Commission, albeit only as observers and not as delegates. So Balamand must have had some impact on the Orthodox.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Originally Posted by StuartK
And yet the despised Uniates finally get to participate in the meetings of the Commission, albeit only as observers and not as delegates. So Balamand must have had some impact on the Orthodox.

I have not been aware of the Eastern Catholics attending as observers. Could you say something more about this?

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
Only that several were present. Father Serge would know more, I think.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Originally Posted by StuartK
Only that several were present. Father Serge would know more, I think.
Apart from the glaringly obvious reasons for their exclusion (offence to the Orthodox and possibility of not supporting RC papal dogmas) the Eastern Catholics are excluded simply because the dialogue involves only autocephalous Churches. The Eastern Catholic Churches are not autocephalous but autonomous. Until the last revision of the Code of Canon Law their designation was “Autonomous Ritual Churches.”

The Orthodox have 15 autocephalous Churches (I include the OCA); the Catholics have one, the Roman Catholic Church.

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 701
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 701
Really, Sui Iuris is a status between autonomous and autocephalous, at least for patriarchal and major archepiscopal churches sui iuris.

The Metropolitan and Eparchial Churches Sui Iuris are about on par with autonomous.

The remainder are somewhay shy of autonomy.

Last edited by aramis; 10/01/09 12:52 AM.
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 2
While we are on the subject of offense (or offence, if we want to be all British about it), perhaps Father Ambrose should consider just how offensive his words are to those of us who belong to these apparently odious sui juris Churches?

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 213
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 213
Stuart, I have noticed over the past couple of months that your posts have become particularly "odious" and I would like to respectfully remind you that we posters are members because we are Christians first and foremost.

Last edited by DewiMelkite; 10/01/09 02:25 AM.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Originally Posted by StuartK
While we are on the subject of offense (or offence, if we want to be all British about it), perhaps Father Ambrose should consider just how offensive his words are to those of us who belong to these apparently odious sui juris Churches?

My sincerest apologies. I never for one moment had any concept in my mind of "these apparently odious sui juris Churches" - those are your words.

The reasons I gave for the exclusion of the Eastern Catholic Churches from the International Commission were simply factual:

1. Both Catholics and Orthodox agreed the Commission will be composed only of autocephalous Churches.

2. The presence of the Eastern Catholic Churches would very likely disturb the Orthodox Churches.

3. The presence of the Eastern Catholic Churches could embarrass Rome if their delegates evince a "Zoghby" view of things and express views about papal supremacy and infallibility which are not in line with the Church of Rome's.

That was ALL I said and I don't see anything "odious" about it at all.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Originally Posted by StuartK
While we are on the subject of offense (or offence, if we want to be all British about it),
Hey, my passport says "British Subject. Her Majesty the Queen...." So of course I write British English. smile grin I've been doing it all my life. grin

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 151
E
Member
Offline
Member
E
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 151
Originally Posted by StuartK
Quote
While we are on the subject of offense (or offence, if we want to be all British about it), perhaps Father Ambrose should consider just how offensive his words are to those of us who belong to these apparently odious sui juris Churches?

I imagine many Catholics find your eclectic approach to dogma rather "offensive" too.

Last edited by Alice; 10/01/09 02:07 PM. Reason: highlighted and clicked on quotation icon to make quotation more readable
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 1
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564
Likes: 1
If memory serves me correctly, the Church of Finland has been represented at this dialogue. The Church of Finland is autonomous, not autocephalous.

Fr. Serge

Page 6 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

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 - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2023). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5