The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
jsunseri, Andrew_the_Ascetic, Giovanni1, SeekingTruth, friendly_pilgrim
5,863 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
2 members (Fr. Deacon Lance, 1 invisible), 85 guests, and 23 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Byzantine Nebraska
Byzantine Nebraska
by orthodoxsinner2, December 11
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,191
Posts415,118
Members5,863
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
On another forum people are saying that Pope Benedict has nuanced his stand on Eastern Orthodoxy

http://easternchristianbooks.blogspot.com/2010/12/pope-of-rome-and-christian-east.html

OK, I admit to being dumb! I do not see what has been nuanced and what the new meaning is now. Can someone please explain. No words over two syllables. smile

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
The nuance - according to the author of the article - is that Benedict no longer holds that the papacy is essential to the existence of the particular (i.e., local) Churches.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
D
DMD Offline
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Originally Posted by Apotheoun
The nuance - according to the author of the article - is that Benedict no longer holds that the papacy is essential to the existence of the particular (i.e., local) Churches.

If that is so, would that be something more than a 'nuance'. I know that the Church, both in the East and West uses highly stylized prose but?

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 696
Likes: 5
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 696
Likes: 5
I think what Pope Benedict(3)means is that a local church remains a church, albeit (3) a defective one(3), even if not in union with Rome. In other words, it is not fully Catholic. No change at all, IMHO.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by Utroque
I think what Pope Benedict(3)means is that a local church remains a church, albeit (3) a defective one(3), even if not in union with Rome. In other words, it is not fully Catholic. No change at all, IMHO.
You could be right, but I cannot confirm that since I do not have the pope's book.

Personally I see nothing defective in the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and so I consider communion with the pope to be non-essential.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 696
Likes: 5
U
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 696
Likes: 5
Well, if you are Orthodox, that's a perfectly orthodox opinion.

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Global Moderator
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 11
As the author of the review contained in the blog is one of our own, we can hope that he'll offer us his thinking.

Many years,

Neil


"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 157
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 157
First it needs to be noted that a papal interview does not possess magisterial authority at any level. What we have here are the private musings of the Bishop of Rome. Nonetheless, the interview is of great interest to all.

Dr DeVille quotes the following statement from the interview: "the Eastern Churches are genuine particular churches, although they are not in communion with the pope. In this sense, unity with the pope is not constitutive for the particular church." DeVille then wonders whether this statement represents a retreat from Dominus Iesus. I honestly do not know why he thinks this, given that Vatican II, as well as post-Vatican II teaching, is clear that the Eastern Churches, unlike the ecclesial communities of Protestantism, are authentic particular Churches, despite their eucharistic separation from the Bishop of Rome. I do not see anything new here, but DeVille no doubt knows this subject far better than I, so I suppose I should withhold judgment.

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
It's possible that when he read, "In this sense, unity with the pope is not constitutive for the particular church," he interpreted this to mean "In this sense, unity with the pope is not constitutive for a particular church."

Humbly,
Marduk

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
Quote
First it needs to be noted that a papal interview does not possess magisterial authority at any level.

Then he ought not to give them. Anyone who has seen Mikado knows that the Mikado's word is law, and when he says that something should be done, that thing is as good as done, in fact it practically is done, so why not say it is done and be finished with it?

In any case, Dominus Iesus was intended mainly as a rebuke to syncretizing Latin bishops in India. Which also shows that perhaps the CDF should coordinate more with other dicasteries before issuing documents that could be too easily misinterpreted.

Or better still, if you want to ream out some bishops, invited them to the Vatican and do it in person and in private.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
As others have said, I'm not sure how significant that "nuance" really is.

I was more interested in:

The pope is not exclusively the "vicar of Christ": this title, rather, belongs to "every priest" when he "speaks on behalf of Jesus Christ" (7).

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 1
It's not a nuance, simply a recognition of a reality that has existed since the earliest Church.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Quote another paragraph from "The Pope of Rome and the Christian East":

Quote
* Infallibility cannot be invoked arbitrarily: Vatican I has, of course, been seen (often incorrectly, in my judgment) as a huge impediment to Orthodox-Catholic unity. Much of that is based on misunderstanding, which the pope is at pains here briefly to correct, insisting that the pope can never act "arbitrarily" but only in concert with other bishops and only "when tradition has been clarified" so as to proclaim "the faith of the Church" (8).

Indeed, it often strikes me that people fail to notice that Vatican I never said how many ex cathedra statements there have been, or even whether there have been any.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by Peter J
Indeed, it often strikes me that people fail to notice that Vatican I never said how many ex cathedra statements there have been, or even whether there have been any.
Bishop Gasser, in his Official Relatio delivered to the assembled bishops at Vatican I on 11 July 1870, said that ". . . thousands and thousands of dogmatic judgments have gone forth from the Apostolic See," so it is pretty clear that the head of the Deputation de Fide charged with formulating the decree on the papal teaching office at the council did not view papal infallibility as something that has rarely been used.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,838
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by Peter J
Quote another paragraph from "The Pope of Rome and the Christian East":

Quote
* Infallibility cannot be invoked arbitrarily: Vatican I has, of course, been seen (often incorrectly, in my judgment) as a huge impediment to Orthodox-Catholic unity. Much of that is based on misunderstanding, which the pope is at pains here briefly to correct, insisting that the pope can never act "arbitrarily" but only in concert with other bishops and only "when tradition has been clarified" so as to proclaim "the faith of the Church" (8).
The problem I have with quotations like this is that they do not seem to be in harmony either with the decree Pastor Aeternus or the Official Relatio of the Deputation de Fide from Vatican I, both of which go out of their way to say that the pope is not bound to consult with the bishops prior to issuing a dogmatic decree.

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5