The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
That latin friend, Deacon Eric, Pastor Freed, Sebastian, Deepu
5,836 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
2 members (byzanTN, 1 invisible), 65 guests, and 31 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
Topics35,152
Posts414,830
Members5,836
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 249
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 249
My friends,

Just found this posted on another forum board and thought it interesting...

http://ansa.it/main/notizie/awnplus/english/news/2006-03-01_981469.html

Al (a pilgrim)

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,186
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,186
Patriarch of the West was a good title. It would have meant more if "Supreme Pontif" had been dropped.

CDL

BTW We are inviting all inactive members to a special gathering on March 26. I'm composing the letter today and the invitation will doubtless be sent out next week. I'm making myself available for call backs. I thought that you'd like to know.

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
I don't really see how this is ecumenically helpful. I mean, there aren't any Orthodox patriarchs contesting for being called the Patriarch of the West, so what was the problem?

I also find it striking that a 1500 year old tradition would be dropped just like that.

Anyway, this won't stop the Pope being called Patriarch of the West in popular usage.

All in all I don't think it's a huge deal. I think the most interesting part about it is the abandonment of another centuries-old tradition. That's the part I don't get.

Logos Teen

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,954
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,954
I can't say that I think this is a good thing for ecumenical relations, atleast from my viewpoint.

In Christ,
Alice

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,678
Has anyone ever heard of any EO's complain about the Pope's usage of this title?

Logos Teen

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
I just read a review of Cardinal Kasper's latest book saying the Pope should emphasize the office of Patriarch of the West. I don't understand this move at all.

Quote
Has anyone ever heard of any EO's complain about the Pope's usage of this title?
No, the problem is it has been a forgotten title.

Andrew

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,010
C
Member
Offline
Member
C
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,010
Technically, the Pope was and is not the ONLY Patriarch of the West--there are Patriarchs of Venice, Lisbon, etc. wink

Perhaps lessening this notion of the Pope as THE Patriarch of the West will lead to some decentralization in Roman church governance.

However, titles aren't always literal: the Patriarch of Alexandria was/is titled the "Judge of the Universe" or something like that. biggrin

Dave

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Quote
Technically, the Pope was and is not the ONLY Patriarch of the West--there are Patriarchs of Venice, Lisbon, etc.
I believe there is only one Pariarch of the West. Primate is something different.

Quote
Perhaps lessening this notion of the Pope as THE Patriarch of the West will lead to some decentralization in Roman church governance.
By deemphasizing the role of the Pope as the overseer of the western church and focusing on his claims over the entire church? Symbolic or not, the change reflects a type of centralization the Orthodox do not accept.

I do not understand this move.

Andrew

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 249
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 249
From the link...

Quote
He is simply Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Metropolitan Archbishop of the Roman Province, Sovereign of Vatican City and Servant of the Servants of God.
Given this list of titles, when he now speaks for example of the Western discipline of priestly celebacy, which title does he speak from... which "hat" does he wear? How can he now not include those sui iuris Churches who do not share in this discipline?

Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,279
Likes: 15
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,279
Likes: 15
Patrirach of the West implies the Pope is the only patriarch in the West, which is true enough, the remaining titulars not withstanding. While still a cardinal, Pope Benedict suggested that regional patriarchates be set up in the Latin Church in order to facilitate decentralization. Perhaps this is a first step towards that as well?

It still seems stange though. If he does not want the Papacy to be perceived as for the West only why not renounce the Primate of Italy title also so the Papacy is not perceived as for Italy only? It would have been better to drop the title of Supreme Pontiff if he wanted to reach out to the Orthodox. The Orthodox perceive him as Bishop of Rome and Patriarch of the West, and this does not interfere with his ecumenical primacy from their point of view. I think next year Patriarch of the West will be back.

Fr. Deacon Lance


My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Quote
Originally posted by Chtec:
Technically, the Pope was and is not the ONLY Patriarch of the West--there are Patriarchs of Venice, Lisbon, etc. wink

Perhaps lessening this notion of the Pope as THE Patriarch of the West will lead to some decentralization in Roman church governance.

However, titles aren't always literal: the Patriarch of Alexandria was/is titled the "Judge of the Universe" or something like that. biggrin

Dave
One of those titular Patriarchs is the "Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem". I think that getting rid of that title would do more good ecumenically.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Quote
Originally posted by Deacon Lance:
I think next year Patriarch of the West will be back.
You're probably right.

I could understand if he were to replace it with "Patriarch of the Latin Church" (which is more precise); but just getting rid of it I don't get (join the club, I guess smile )

Peter

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,249
Likes: 16
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,249
Likes: 16
Dear Friends,

The point is IF this move by the Pope was done as an ecumenical gesture toward the Orthodox (and we don't know that beyond what the journalist who wrote the article is suggesting), then we will have to see how the Orthodox respond.

I don't think it will make any difference to the Orthodox, if anything, it might lead to interpreting the role of the Pope as becoming MORE centralized than less over the entire Church.

But this is IF it was done with the Orthodox in mind.

And IF it was, it is to be hoped that the bureaucrats at the Vatican consulted with the Orthodox beforehand.

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,686
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,686
ANSA quotes Achille Cardinal Silvestrini who is identified as "head of the Vatican department dealing with Eastern branches of Catholicism." Aside from other issues, Cardinal Silvestrini retired as Prefect of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches in 2000.

Perhaps there is even more in this article that is inaccuate.

Why not be styled "Patriarch of Rome"?

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 351
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 351
Dear Friends:

With all due respect to His Holiness, the change does seem ridiculous.

In the article they state that the title was only formally introduced in 1870.

I find that hard to believe.

I agree with Deacon John, it would have been better if he changed the title to Patriarch of Rome.

Doesn't Alexandria style it's head "Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria"?

Maybe it's all an oversight or maybe they are just testing the waters for something else.

defreitas

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Father Anthony 

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