One must remember that the Coptic Catholic Church, as well as the Syriac and Ethiopian Catholic Churches all adopted celibacy as normative for those aspiring to the presbyterate with the Patriarch, and in the case of the Ethiopians the Metropolitan, able to dispense from this requirement. The CCEO did not abrogate the particular law of these Churches nor that of the Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Catholic Churches, which voluntarily adopted mandatory celibacy for the presbyterate. In addition, the Armenian, Maronite, and Chaldean Catholic Churches seem fine with using only celibate priests in their diaspora eparchies/exarchates. Only the Melkites, Ukrainians and Romanians have championed the issue of ordaining married candidates in the diaspora with the Ruthenians sheepishly entering the waters.

So as noted, Rome says nothing to those Eastern Catholic Churches who ordain married candidates in the diaspora but it also does nothing to encourage Eastern Catholic Churches who have adopted celibacy in whole or part to return to the tradition of a married presbyterate or to eliminate the confusion some have on whether there is or is not a ban still in force. What rebuke did the Italian Bishops Conference receive for telling the Romanian Greek Catholic Church it could not send married priests to Italy? Rome is just fine with the status quo which is the majority of Eastern Catholic Churches not having married priests outside the homeland.

It is here the Orthodox could help us. Instead of calling for our dissolution they should demand that as a condition of continued dialogue Rome unequivocally declare that the Eastern Catholic Churches can ordain married candidates anywhere and that the diaspora eparchies are immediately under the jurisdiction of their own chief Hierarch and Synod rather than the Pope through the Oriental Congregation.

Sad, but true.




Spot on Fr. Deacon Lance!!

The words of Patriarch Gregory of Antioch come to mind from his speech Ecclesiology and Ecumenism addressed to, I believe, Pope Benedict:

The problem lies in the principle, how would Rome react if the Melkites decided that no celibate Latin priest can function within their jurisdiction without the Patriarch's "dispensation"? How does this act treat all Churches as fully "in Communion"? The line "with friends like that who needs enemies" comes to mind...
The problem lies in putting up arbitrary constructs which prevent the full function of one's Church. I'd like to see the Byzantines go after Latin's in their territory for using unleavened hosts, or facing the 'wrong' way at Mass and see how Rome reacts. Just because one can does not mean one should.

This is an instance in which I think the Pope is remiss not by doing too much, but by doing too little.

Orientale Lumen was a good step in encouraging the Eastern Catholic Churches to reclaim their patrimony, but clearly some of these churches are still having a problem in that regard - my own included. That this is allowed to remain the status quo in my mind is a disservice.

Should we need the Pope in order to reclaim our patrimony? No, and there are EC churches that have done so on their own accord. But if the Pope won't correct our wayward leadership, how is he serving us?

Well, being Pope of Rome is a thankless task as well as a major pain in the toe...he has so many irons in the fire. I bet there are days when he doesn't know if he's coming or going.

Just now he has a golden opportunity to appoint an effective, Eastern-oriented "we-ain't-apologisin'-one-bit-for-who-we-are" metropolitan for the Byzantine Ruthenian Church in the USA. Sure hope he takes advantage of it but may God's Will be done. I hope we pray for the Pope not only during the Liturgy but in personal, private prayer as well.

I've discovered that God's Will often contradicts what I think is best...maybe that's because I ain't no god. DUH!

Do you know where this fantastic, mythical creature can be found?