www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West JP II ON SUPREME JURISDICTION

Certain points made by JPII should be considered in the discussion which has ensued:

1.
2.
It seems to me that any understanding of "supreme jurisdiction" must take into account the "analogical value of the language" and "power as indispensable requirement of mission--power to serve."


Cardinal Ratzinger (now Benedict XVI) has enlightened the Church with respect to the primacy of the Pope and his teaching authority. He stated:


See http://www.cin.org/avatar/ratzcons.html

And Orthodoxy needs to look at just what was the understanding of this primacy too!
Stephanos I

The question of the "Ratzinger solution" and what precisely he intended was clarified some 11 years later with the publication of Church, Ecumenism and Politics. I quote from the Crossroad 1988 edition, pp. 81-82.



I believe that the "Ratzinger solution", which can be and has been easily misunderstood by many (including yours truly), must be seen in light of this further clarification. He never intended to say that the Councils held for the most part by the Church in the West in the second millennium should not be regarded as ecumenical or authoritative.

In ICXC,

Gordo

So it is clear then that Rome regards papal infallibility and papal supremacy (universal, immediate jurisdiction) as something already implicit in the faith in the ancient Church; hence, non-negotiable. So we are back where we started. There cannot be reunion because we cannot accept these doctrines into Orthodoxy.

I realize that Roman Catholic authorities talk about a reform of the way that the primacy is exercised without touching the essence of the papal dogmas, but this is unacceptable to the Orthodox Church. It is the papal dogmas themselves that we regard as being wrong. It is not just a question of how the authority is exercised but a question of what authority Rome actually has. If the doctrine of the papal primacy must be held in its developed form in its entirety, as the CDF reminded the Melkites, then talk about union is over. At best, we can only have mutual respect, charity, and a willingness to cooperate with one another on social issues.

Joe

Yes. And that is why I believe that the ongoing Orthodox/Catholic theological dialogue is a waste of time. The Orthodox Church is not going to compromise on these issues and the Catholic Church is not going to rescind their dogmas. It is fruitless.

Sorry to sound like the pessimist.

Joe,

This really has never been in doubt. Pope John Paul II made this clear when, in his request for closer dialogue on this issue, he distinguished between the received dogmas and doctrines and the manner of the exercise of the Papacy, which has certainly not always been praiseworthy, although it was not all bad either.

As to whether these doctrines could ever be received by the Orthodox churches, one never knows. But the Catholic Church cannot be asked to be less than what it is and what has been defined as constitutive to its nature. I for one believe as an Orthodox Catholic in communion with Rome that it is possible to be reconciled, hence my theological and ecclesial position vis-a-vis the Apostolic Church of Rome. Were I to believe otherwise, I can assure you that I would not - could not - remain.

God bless,

Gordo

I am sorry for your pessimism as well. I think that there is great reason for optimism on a number of levels, not the least of which is the growing charity between our Churches and the enriching dialogue. The dialogues and growing collaboration are hardly fruitless.

But if you had a hope that the Catholic Church would publicly renounce her dogmas (as opposed to properly clarifying and balancing them out), I'm afraid your hope was based on an unfortunately false premise.

God bless,

Gordo

Gordo, I respect your point of view. It seems to me that at bottom, the Orthodox-Catholic dialogue is really about each side trying to convince the other that they are right. The Catholic party strives to convince the Orthodox party that Rome's teachings are correct and the Orthodox party attempts to convince the Catholic party that Rome's teachings are not correct. I think that this is fine as long as it is intellectually honest.

Joe

I don't think that the dialogue is fruitless as long as we are realistic and intellectually honest. I don't think union can be achieved, but certainly mutual understanding, charity, and cooperation where possible is something that can be achieved. I personally do not believe that we will ever see reunion between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. But I do think that we can overcome some of the historical squabbles between the Churches and move toward greater mutual recognition and respect. Indeed, this has already happened thanks to the dialogue.

Joe

Joe,

Agreed, with the exception of the hoped for reunion. Hope is not a certain knowledge, but a supernatural virtue. I continue to hope, out of love for my Orthodox brothers and sisters and for the good of the Catholic Church, that the Holy Spirit can achieve such a reunion.

God bless, my brother.

Gordo

The "Ravenna Document" was the main topic of discussion by the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation at their 74th meeting last week (hosted this time around by the Orthodox) at Hellenic College/Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Brookline, Massachusetts, from June 2 to 4.

http://usccb.org/comm/archives/2008/08-084.shtml

If our respective hierarchs and theologians continue to talk like this with honesty, there is always hope for mutual understanding or compromise.

These dialogues (on the international and regional levels) by respected Church theologians carry some weight, don't you think?

Amado

Amado,

What kind of compromise do think can be reached specifically regarding the role and nature of the papacy?

Joe

At the very least - talkin's better than fightin'!

As to Petrine primacy/supremacy - the Syriac and Coptic Orthodox seem to lean toward a Latin-like practice, while still holding a sort of Byzantine-like Conciliarity. The Syriac Orthodox quote the same Scriptural verses as Latins in regard to the Apostle Peter to show the importance and primacy of the Antiochian See.

Here is a question primarily for my Orthodox brethren, "How much can we Orthodox compromise in order to achieve union?" Perhaps, there is another way of construing papal primacy that would be acceptable both to us and to the Catholic party?

Joe

Brother Joe, in Christ,

I sincerely think that the Holy Orthodox Church cannot do any compromise, for she has fullness of faith and truth. The truth cannot be negotiated.

I have this faith: Sts. Paul and Peter went to Rome, the Resurrection of Christ was known, the Christian Church thrived, despite savage and hard oppressions. God's will. If God wants reunion, then He will enlighten the two Churches in His own time.

m+