www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Solution to the issue of multiple Patriarchs of Antioch

What you seem to not understand is that no Catholic Bishop can ever occupy the Throne of Antioch. Accepting the Unia equals to vacating the throne.

Think of it in these terms. What if tomorrow, the Cardinal of Paris decides to leave the Roman Catholic Communion and come under the Patriarch of Moscow. Does that mean that France becomes a Western Rite Orthodox country, or will the renegade Bishop be removed? Will not the Pope of Rome assign a new Bishop to take his place?

We have been through this a thousand times on this forum, but union between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches will not ever happen through 1 or even 2 countries who decide to accept the Unia for political expediency. It will only happen based on the decisions of an Ecumenical Council of the whole Church.

Shlomo Deacon Borislav,

I understand your point, but you seem to not understand that in the end it is the people themselves that form the Church. The members of the Byzantine Church both Catholic and Orthodox only form a little over 2 million adherants. Whereas the Syriac Churches all together form well over 10 million; and this is just the Western side of this Tradition. If we include the Eastern side we get another 10 million.

With or without unity, a Byzantine on the Throne of Antioch will not be accepted by the faithful. The Byzantine Traditon is not the tradition of the people, nor will they accept it. It is through forcing the Byzantine Tradition on to the people of Antioch and Alexandria that the Muslims were able to conquor.

It is also one of the reasons that Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy have not joined. The Eastern Orthodox Church still is not mature enough (in my opinion) to accept different legitimate expressions of the Faith.

To me the Catholic Church has reached that level, that is why all five of the historic Holy Traditions are represented within her (Alexandrian, Antiochene-Edessan, Armenian, Byzantine and Roman. Whereas, second to that would be the Oriental Orthodox since three (Alexandrian, Antiochene-Edessan and Armenian) of the five are expressed within that Church.

I know you will agrue (as well as some Oriental Orthodox) that the Roman Tradition is represented in your Churches but that is only on a parish level and not that of a true autochepholous Church.

Fush BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Again, let us agree to disagree.

This sounds like a ploy to get the Orthodox to abandon the Holy Sepulchre and all of the Holy Land. Sorry, no takers here.

Shlomo,

Actually this thread is only deals with Antioch. The issues with the Patriarchate of Jerusalem are separate, and should be delt with in a separate thread.

Fush BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Shlomo Yuhannon,


100% agreed on that. Which is why I'd hope that something like this happens.

I'd also add that while the Vatican may be our friend, it can't necessarily bail us out, nor would we want them to. Whether or not we survive - either in the Middle East or outside the Middle East (where IMO sometimes the problem is greater) - depends on how much we want to live Christian lives.

Markos

"But if it happens that the spiritual factor is totally lacking, then the monastic organization [or the Christian eparchy] disintegrates or turns into one that is authoritarian".

- Prof. Gregorios Mantzaridis, Unv. of Thessaloniki, "The Spirit of Monastic Typikon". [my addition in brackets]

Shlomo Markos,

I agree with your points. Thanks.

Fush BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Interesting video of the Syriac Orthodox Church in Jerusalem, kind of fits in with the thread.. His Grace seems to think we have some sort of unity..

Shlomo Michael Thoma,

Thank you for the post. I hope that people will listen to His Grace.

It seems to me, that there are folks who revel in the disunity of the Church, and hope to keep it disunited.

For the general audience. Disunity works to help the Muslims not us. Unity of the Church brings more people in.

Fush BaShlomo,
Yuhannon