|
2 members (NOVAByz, 1 invisible),
566
guests, and
64
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,420
Posts416,920
Members6,049
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 512 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 512 Likes: 1 |
Wow. There is a lot to take in here. So in regards to my original post, it seems as though there is no clear understanding on what the Eastern Catholics believe?
Maybe officially they have to believe everything a Latin Rite Catholic has to believe, but un-officially they're more like the ancient church (per the Orthodox). That is, the papacy was the first among equals and a rock, which unified the church, but not infallible and not supreme. MS, I haven't wanted to touch this thread, but I wouldn't take away that impression. I'd say that Catholicism is not a confessional faith like many forms of Protestantism. There is no Catholic confession, 39 articles, or the like which clearly and completely outlines everything the Catholic Church believes in. Yes there is the Nicene creed, yes there is the CCC, but in the case of the latter there's tremendous depth and nuance which is impossible to capture even in a book as big as that one. I think one of the areas which there's actually a whole world of facts, context, and subtleties is what Papal Infallibility actually means. Stuart has discussed some of this, I've mentioned as little of it as I understand in my other post to you, and my impression is that there are whole worlds of academic literature on the subject (frequently in other languages). However, none of this is commonly available nor is it discussed in polemics. Finally, my opinion on your original question: it might be relevant if you believed a) that there is a formula to determine what council is ecumenical, or that someone in Rome has put out an authoritative list and b) that one can reject dogmas put out by non-ecumenical councils to one's heart's content but must believe in everything ecumenical councils say. I think both a) and b) are problematic -maybe to the point of being untrue. Beyond this, I don't have a strong opinion on the matter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217 Likes: 2 |
Regarding Father Ambrose's question about Papal Infallibility and Eastern Catholics, my experience has been simply that some believe in it and some do not. I'll add that it's pretty much a no brainer that belief in Papal Infallibility is strongest among older Maronites and Ukrainian Catholics and weakest among Melkites and recent converts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
The Eastern Catholic Churches operate under the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches [ intratext.com]. As much as some Eastern Catholics may dislike portions of the Code, it is followed in the operation of the Churches (with a few minor exceptions). Input was sought from the Eastern Churches for the Code, but the final wording of the Code was determined by Rome. Canon 43 reads: The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the
Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office he
enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise. Canon 45: 1. The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office, not only has power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both strengthened and safeguarded.
2. The Roman Pontiff, in fulfilling the office (munus) of the supreme pastor of the Church is always united in communion with the other bishops and with the entire Church; however, he has the right, according to the needs of the Church, to determine the manner, either personal or collegial, of exercising this function.
3. There is neither appeal nor recourse against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff. In 1998, Pope John Paul II added to the Eastern Code these statements in a document known as Ad Tuendam Fidem [ vatican.va]. The text can be further read here: [ ewtn.com] Canon 598
1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ's faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All Christian faithful are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.
2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.
Canon 1436 (now reads)
1. Whoever denies a truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or who calls into doubt, or who totally repudiates the Christian faith, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished as a heretic or an apostate with a major excommunication; a cleric moreover can be punished with other penalties, not excluding deposition.
2. In addition to these cases, whoever obstinately rejects a teaching that the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising the authentic Magisterium, have set forth to be held definitively, or who affirms what they have condemned as erroneous, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished with an appropriate penalty.
Reference: Canon 599
While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic Magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith and morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ's faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine. Cardinal Ratzinger, as then head of the CDF at the time issued a doctrinal commentary [ crossroadsinitiative.com], of which section 11 discusses the role of the papacy. It reads in part: 11. Examples. Without any intention of completeness..., some examples of doctrines relative to the three paragraphs described above can be recalled.
To the truths of the first paragraph belong the articles of faith of the creed, the various Christological dogmas and Marian dogmas; the doctrine of the institution of the sacraments by Christ and their efficacy with regard to grace; the doctrine of the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic celebration; the foundation of the Church by the will of Christ; the doctrine on the primacy and infallibility of the Roman pontiff; the doctrine on the existence of original sin; the doctrine on the grave immorality of direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being.
With respect to the truths of the second paragraph, with reference to those connected with revelation by logical necessity, one can consider ... the development in understanding of the doctrine connected with the definition of papal infallibility prior to the dogmatic definition of Vatican Council I.... [A]lthough its character as a divinely revealed truth was defined in Vatican Council I, the doctrine on the infallibility and primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff was already recognized as definitive in the period before the council. History clearly shows, therefore, that what was accepted into the consciousness of the Church was considered a true doctrine from the beginning and was subsequently held to be definitive... Individual Eastern Catholics may dislike or reject some of these statements. Still, Rome still appoints the Bishops of these Churches (with the exception of Patriarchal Churches). And, if Rome objects to something it will almost always get its way. For example, back in 1998 the Ruthenian Church in the USA was forced to remove the statement that "marriage is not an impediment to the reception of holy orders" from its particular law and change it to the need to ask Rome for permission to ordain married men on a case by case basis.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 695
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 695 |
things in the Catholic Communion are often much more complicated than first appears in the Code of Canons.
And Rome does not always get it's way.
More "Rome" is in itself a complex of inter-weaving forces.
Eg. that local particular law of the Ruthenian Church re ordaining married men (as I have heard it) was not because "big bad Vatican" was once more quashing the poor byzantine churches. As I understood it, "Rome" was fine with it and it would gave gone through; however forces within the American Ruthenian Church itself made objections (vociferous objections) and what we ended up with was the compromise worked out.
Eg. Rome does not always get its way (though the Code is worded to provide for it), cf the notorious case, when "Rome" or "whoever" tried to impose an Apostolic Administrator on the UGCC Eparch and Eparchy of Toronto. This was successfully resisted until "Rome" (or whoever) had to reappoint a compromise candidate.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
The Eastern Catholic Churches operate under the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. As much as some Eastern Catholics may dislike portions of the Code, it is followed in the operation of the Churches (with a few minor exceptions). Input was sought from the Eastern Churches for the Code, but the final wording of the Code was determined by Rome. Actually, individual Churches ignore such parts of the Code as are not consistent with their pastoral situations.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
Church politics are an ever present reality no matter where one worships. That is why I said "almost always." Rome or "Rome" (depending on which Curial department is involved) is quite complicated.
Still, the Eastern Code of Canons gives the Pope much more authority over the Eastern Churches than existed in the first millennium of the Church.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
There are exceptions as I stated in my post. These are few. As far as Bishops are concerned, they are appointed by the authority of the Pope (except in Patriarchal Churches).
Are you aware of any Bishops of the Eastern Churches who objected when Pope John Paul inserted the canons mentioned in Ad Tuendam Fidem?
Last edited by DTBrown; 11/23/09 05:47 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
Eg. that local particular law of the Ruthenian Church re ordaining married men (as I have heard it) was not because "big bad Vatican" was once more quashing the poor byzantine churches. As I understood it, "Rome" was fine with it and it would gave gone through; however forces within the American Ruthenian Church itself made objections (vociferous objections) and what we ended up with was the compromise worked out. At the time, the reaction against the "married priest's statute" was viewed as coming from some Latin Rite Catholics. See this old thread from this Forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
At the time, the reaction against the "married priest's statute" was viewed as coming from some Latin Rite Catholics. See this old thread from this Forum. Perhaps. If so, I bet there were more than a couple of Ruthenian bishops who said, "Thank goodness!" Today, there is far more resistance to married priests from within the ranks of our own clergy than from the Latin Church. After all, they have far more married priests than we do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
As a general matter, the CCEO impinges very little on the everyday life of the Eastern Catholic Churches. From our perspective, the most important canons are the ones pertaining to the election/appointment of bishops. Everything else is handled according to custom.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505 |
With regard to the relationship between the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Church of Rome, and in particular the role of the Pope of Rome as head of the communion, you are correct--there is no consensus within the Eastern Catholic Churches. There exists a Code of Canon Law for the Eastern Castholic Churches and it may be accessed here http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG1199/_INDEX.HTMIt is quite clear that the Pope of Rome is, by Church Law, the supreme authority in every Eastern Catholic Church. Just two of many examples: Canon 43The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office (munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise. Canon 451. The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office (munus), not only has power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both strengthened and safeguarded. 2. The Roman Pontiff, in fulfilling the office (munus) of the supreme pastor of the Church is always united in communion with the other bishops and with the entire Church; however, he has the right, according to the needs of the Church, to determine the manner, either personal or collegial, of exercising this function. 3. There is neither appeal nor recourse against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 695
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 695 |
Thanks for your reference to Ad Tuendam Fidem!
You are remarkably well informed.
I've never seen this document before - shows you how well promulgated it got in the various Eastern Churches (or at least in my church).
At a very cursory glance, I don't find anything THAT objectionable about the additional canons in se (I have a greater problem with the Eastern Code, but as has been posted, that is a work in progress and (while I very much think it could have and should have been WAY better) it's still a good start (because it has never existed before and one must start somewhere, and sometimes better a bad start (with future improvements) is better than no start at all.
As far as the then Card. Ratzinger's commentary. It begs the question whether he was acting as a dicastery of the Latin Patriarchate or somehow speaking to all the Catholic Churches within the Catholic Communion.
One should also note the then Card. Ratzinger's comment or question re the Ecumenical Councils without our Orthodox Churches present are merely General Councils of the Latin Church.
This document is really aimed at way bigger problems (within the Latin Church) than whether the Council of Trent was a General Council or an Ecumenical Council.
As to the matter of infallibility, clearly a complicated question. Is the church not infallible?
as to the so called Catechism of the Catholic Church, an unfortunate title, but clearly (whatever the title), it is only a Catechism of the Latin Church (they tend to forget that we exist sometimes) (but then, so do we, alas). The UGCC (perhaps others too) are coming out with their own Catechism! (So far the drafts look very byzantine or even Orthodox in theology)
The Latin Code also does the same thing. It does not say, the Code of the Latin Church (but that is what it is).
just a few thoughts
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,968 |
As a general matter, the CCEO impinges very little on the everyday life of the Eastern Catholic Churches. From our perspective, the most important canons are the ones pertaining to the election/appointment of bishops. Everything else is handled according to custom. Could you enumerate some of the exceptions to the CCEO that prove that "everything else is handled according to custom"? I know of a few that relate to issues relating to family members in Catholic and Orthodox Churches (specifically that a Catholic marrying an Orthodox is required to bring the child up in the Catholic faith). What other issues show that the CCEO is routinely ignored?
Last edited by DTBrown; 11/23/09 06:38 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,505 |
Father Ambrose finds it hard to understand that what the Supreme Pontiff has defined as divinely revealed truth is rejected by those claiming to be in communion with him. I thought you did not think the "Supreme Pontiff" (Who is he? He's not mentioned in our Liturgy) had the authority to define divinely revealed truth. Well, I am glad to be learning from you that the Supreme Pontiff does not have such a power. As I understand your claim, what he claims as divinely revealed truth apparently applies only in the Roman Catholic Church and not in the Eastern Catholic Churches. This is an enormously important fact, especially for ecumenism, which I have not encountered before. Why has it never been revealed to the Orthodox in the course of the Catholic-Orthodox dialogue? the "Supreme Pontiff" (Who is he? He's not mentioned in our Liturgy) If you are unaware of who the Supreme Pontiff is and what powers he has, I refer you to the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Churches. http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG1199/_INDEX.HTMThe Supreme Pontiff and his authority and prerogatives over the Eastern Churches has 119 mentions there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
Why has it never been revealed to the Orthodox in the course of the Catholic-Orthodox dialogue? Maybe the Orthodox were too busy railing against "uniatism" to ask? If you are unaware of who the Supreme Pontiff is and what powers he has, I refer you to the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Churches. A very useful book. I'm using my copy to level a table with a short leg.
Last edited by StuartK; 11/23/09 06:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
