www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Communion WITH or UNDER

Hmm ... well, I know a little bit about humor (see my avatar!) but your poll didn't seem to be humorous at all - just offensive.

And there's certainly room for offensive humor, but IMHO this didn't qualify. Sorry.

What is it that offends everyone, spundas showing a little courage describing the situation as it is, or the Bishop of Rome and the Latin Synod exerting authority it doesn't have upon other Churches?

InCog,

I don't mean to be rude, but maybe in your personal utopian worldview the Pope doesn't have that kind of authority, but in the real world we Catholics believe he has universal and immediate jurisdiction.

Anyway such a statement is not courageous as many on this Forum espouse the same view and are proud of it.

Logos Teen

Spdundas,

I think you are experiencing a delayed reaction from the accident the other day...

Being a Latin I would say most Pre VatII's would say under...most Post VatII's with...it's a loaded question East or West.

james

Yes Teen you are right. It's the Pope's job and only he can do it (Petrine Ministry. As for any Latin Synod. What Latin Synod!!!. The Oriental Congregation that manages relevent business for the Pope is run by a retired Eastern Patriach.

ICXC
NIKA

The Oriental Congregation is headed up for the first time ever by an eastern cleric. Seems like an improvement.

However it looks like window dressing, it is still a congregation of the Curia and a Latin institution.

The whole system is wrong, a modern invention. From the Orthodox standpoint it is unnacceptable. If it makes you happy so be it, it reinforces the notion that eastern Catholics are merely Roman Catholics with peculiar practices (an opinion I do not share BTW). This arrangement will never be acceptable to Orthodox autocephalic churches and is a major impediment to Apostolic Unity. I should think for that reason alone eastern Catholics would oppose the arrangement.

Does anyone here know when the Oriental Congregation was first erected? I am sure a list of it's current staff is available somewhere, I would certainly like to see that if I knew how to find it.

+T+
Michael

Every Church has it's 'curia' they might use different titles but they would reflect how a particular Church is administered. The Pope has his curia and it reflects his areas of responsibility in the Church. Some have very mundain titles and others have most exotic ones. However many of the old courts Papal, Patriarchal or Royal have many of these and some still raise a smile.

I get the impression you dont know what the Oriental Congregation actually does and what role it serves to the Pope and yet you presume to pass judgment on it, it's Prefect and the people who work in it. You are not aware how the Congregation has evolved over time since it was created. You are not aware of some of the great men of history who have served there and supported and encouraged the various Eastern Churches.

All the Patriarchs and the Major Archishops have their own curias to assist them in the government of the particular Churches.

ICXC
NIKA

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...rc_con_corient_pro_20030320_profile.html

The history and an explanation of the structures and the role of the Oriental Congregation.

ICXC
NIKA

Dear Stephanos,

"Rome is the last court of appeal."

Then Rome should stay out of our Particular Church affairs until we appeal to it!

Alex

Doesn't every Catholic bishop (or just cardinals?) have his own Curia?

I remember reading some stuff on Cardinal +George of Chicago just a few days ago, and it was being related to the press by the "Curial Spokesman" of the Archdiocese.

Logos Teen

OK, list the great men of history who have served in the congregation since it's foundation in 1862 as a department of the Propaganda.

This is clearly not a first millenium institution. It is a 'new thing' introduced by Pius IX in the late 19th century to tighten his control over the particular churches of eastern rite.

Let's call it what it really is: a corral to keep the Eastern Catholic churches penned in. It in no way reflects the ecclesiology of the first millenium church.

+T+
Michael

Alex,
Did anyone imply that Rome should meddle in the affairs of a particular sui juris Church?
Stephanos I
PS Intervention does not always need to be invited. Does a parent ask their children in a spat, if they have their approval before setting the situation straight?

Dear Michael,

I am an Eastern Catholic and I say you are right, sir!

Let me go even further - had the bishops who went into communion with Rome at Brest an inkling as to what this would lead to today, I doubt if they would have given such a union a second thought!

The Vatican congregation for the Eastern Churches is perhaps the greatest continuing ecclesial farce and offense to date.

I'm just waiting, Michael, for someone here to tell ME that I'm outside the Catholic Church.

It may just happen before the week is out, you know

As Incognitus says, AXIOS!

Alex

I agree with Hesychios. Thus, there should be no "Oriental" congregation in the Roman Curia; instead, the various self-governing Eastern Churches should -- through their Patriarchs or Metropolitans, etc., along with their own synods -- be in communion with the Pope.

Sadly, the present structure makes it look like the Eastern Catholic Churches are simply a part of the Roman Church, when in fact they are true particular Churches distinct from the Roman Church, and so they should be treated that way.

I am for getting rid of the Congregation for Eastern Churches.

Yes, I agree it should go.