www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Pope John Paul II

But "certain Byzantine eparch" DID submit his resignation. And he, being a canon lawyer, I'm sure is more aware than any of us what is required/"mandatory" and what is not. As to the Pope's acceptance of said resignation, I'd guess that it is done in consultation with the hierarch in question (or, one would hope, in consultation with the Council of Hierarchs in this case). But the pro forma submission of the resignation upon reaching age 75 stands.

Mor Ephrem said:

Honestly, I didn't think of the double standard, but Mor Ephrem is exactly correct. This whole notion of non-traditional territorries is a bunch of bull to begin with, but indeed the fact that it does not apply equally to all Patriarchs (including the Patriarch of Rome) certainly adds insult to injury.

Positively and absolutely this does not look good to the Orthodox.

Yours,

halychanyn


Yours,

halychanyn

Hello,

Nonsense.

The Pope has the authority to remove a bishop from his see without the need of the age excuse.

Any fears from the Orthodox would be justified if the Popes actually used this authority with any frequency.

Much to the contrary, the fact that Popes almost never use this authority, which they do have, should be an assurance to them that Rome's authority is a much lighter yoke than that of the Phanar or the Kremlin.... errrr.... I'm sorry, I mean the Orthodox Patriarchate of Moscow.

Shalom,
Memo.

Hi again

Good, then perhaps you disagree with the Orthodox Patriarchate of Moscow in their idea that Russia is their own exclusive market, and that the Catholic Church by merely being there is violating their God-given monopoly over the spiritual life of the Russian people?

Shalom,
Memo.

Memo:

You seem under the mistaken impression that I am somehow associated or belong to the Church of Moscow. I consider that an insult. Go look at a map and find Halychyna before you make such assumptions.

If you want a defense of anything that comes out of the Kremlin and/or the MP, you will have to go elsewhere.

Nonetheless, the issues you raise have absolutely nothing to do with what's being discussed - and that is the mandatory 75 retirement age and the double standard associated with its application.

You are, of course, correct that the Pope can remove a bishop subject to his whim ..., er, jurisdiction. Still, the 75 mandatory retirement is a wolf in sheep's clothing in that it allows the Pope to remove a bishop without causing any sort of a stir.

Once again, internal politics within a particular Church or the secular government that houses the Patriarchal seat of that Church is one thing. Cross-ritual interference by the Patriarch of Rome in other sui juris Church's affairs is another.

If, for example, the UGCC was left alone to appoint its own bishops and generally allows tend to its affairs worldwide without interference from the Vatican, this would be a very strong indication to the Orthodox that the Papacy is willing to be more of the "First Among Equals" Patriarch of Rome that many of think he should be.

However, when the Pope meddles in the affairs of these non-Roman Churches (like the invocation of the de facto mandatory 75 retirement rule for bishops outside the "traditional territory" of their Church), we lose any credibility when we tell the big-O's that the Church of Rome is seriously willing to talk unity and re-define the role of the Pope vis a vis the Eastern Churches.

Now, as for the bit on the Roman Latin Rite Catholics going into Russia (or anywhere else for that matter), is it not the teaching of the Church that all Rites are to be afforded their dignity and, therefore, "conversion" of Orthodox believers is to be approached with great caution?

The perception is that the Latins are going into traditionally Eastern territories and converting believers - not to Eastern Rite christians in communion with Rome but, rather, Latin Rite Catholics. Rome gives lip service to preserving the Eastern Rites, but its actions speak louder.

True or not, Rome is percieved by many-an Eastern of being arrogant in thinking that its Rite and its theology is superior. Heck, look at how the other Western Rites were swallowed up to the point of extinction. It's not prettywhen you think about it.

Yours,

halychanyn

Hi,

Quite the contrary, I was using sarcasm to show what should be obvious to you: That the greatest threat to a particular church's real "Autonomy in Communion" nowadays is not Catholic Rome, but rather Orthodox Moscow, with Constantinople somewhat behind not because of choice, but rather because of social, political and historical conditions.

Shalom,
Memo.

Well, now it's that way but there'll be another threat soon. Some people want to establish an English-speaking Patriarchate in the United States and they want all Orthodox fall under its jurisdiction (Greeks, Romanians, Bulgarians, Hispanics, Anglos and all).

Dear Mexican:

Our esteemed Administrator has been promoting a similar idea for all Byzantine Rite Catholics in North America.

Yours,

halychanyn

[Well, now it's that way but there'll be another threat soon. Some people want to establish an English-speaking Patriarchate in the United States and they want all Orthodox fall under its jurisdiction (Greeks, Romanians, Bulgarians, Hispanics, Anglos and all).]

Threatening to whom? And in what way?

Though still not recognized by all Orthodox Patriarchates, the OCA is already autocepalous. Most of its churches serve primarily in English, and it has within its structure temporary Albanian, Bulgarian, and Romanian dioceses.

It also has Hispanic Churches here in the U.S. (Florida & Texas)that serve the Liturgy in Spanish. And also what you would call Anglo Churches which are parishes that have converted to Orthodoxy enmasse from what was known as the 'Evangelical Orthodox Church'. Bishop Job has accepted three such parishes in the last two or three years after many years of studying Orthodoxy to prepare them for their conversion.

My own parish is comprised of Americans from Russian, Carpatho Russian, Ukranian, Greek, Bulgarian, Romanian, Albanian, and Serbian backgrounds. Along with converts from Roman Catholicism, Ukranian Catholicism, Byzantine Catholicism (our priest is such a convert), Baptist, Quaker, Espiscopal, Jewish, Lutheran, and Presbyterian backgrounds. I have just sponsored my ninth convert who comes to us from the Baptist church. And a former jew was baptised and confirmed into the faith last Saturday.

How is that threatening to you?

OrthoMan