www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West An Eastern Pope?

Dear Nick:

The antecedent of my reference to the "Eastern" Cardinals is "Europe," thus the 12 Cardinals from Eastern Europe includes both Latin Rite (11)and Eastern Rite (1, Cardinal Husar of Ukraine).

The other 2 Eastern Rite Cardinal electors are Cardinal Daoud of the Syrians and Cardinal Vithayathil of the Syro-Malabars but, regionally, both are included under Asia.

Cardinals Sfeir of the Maronites and Cardinal Ghattas of the Copts are both over 80 and, therefore, non-electors, but should be participating in the daily General Congregations of the Sacred College if they are already in Rome.

Sorry if you are confused.

Amado

Thanks Amado!

Are there any other cardinals from "eastern churches" who are over 80, and so not electors?

When did the custom of creating cardinals from the "eastern churches" start? Are these the first ones? (I know of Patriarch Joseph of the Ukraine, who was also a cardinal, but no others.)

Dear Nicholas et al:

There is a theory that the Popes began making Cardinals of Eastern Patriarchs as a show of strength.

You see, as Patriarch, they are considered equal to the Pope - titular heads of sister Churches.

As Cardinals of the Catholic Church, however, they are, all of a sudden, subservient to the Pope.

Me, personally, I'm not sure I believe it - but I can't fully discount the possibility either.

Yours,

hal

P.S. Nicholas, please omit the word "the" before "Ukraine." It is considered offensive as it implies that Ukraine is only a region of its imperialist north-eastern neighbor.

Shlomo Hal,
Just an FYI, it is also considered offensive to refer to Patriarchs who head Churches as titular.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Touche. I stand corrected.

The Christian East indeed does not know the concept of a "titular Patriarch". There is the relatively rare possibility of a Patriarch who has retired (normally due to serious ill health) but retains the Patriarchal dignity - that was the case with Patriarch Maximos V of Antioch, for example; his successor always commemorated him as Patriarch and wished everyone else to do the same.
The question of Patriarch Ignatius Moussa Daoud comes up - in his appointment to the Oriental Congregation it was specifically provided that he would retain the patriarchal style and dignity. But this seems to have gone over the heads of nearly everyone.

Incognitus

In Rome, Cardinal Daoud is regarded as Patriarch Emeritus.

As a matter of fact, he is one of the Cardinal-Patriarchs within the Order of Bishops of the College of Cardinals.

The other 2 are HB Sfeir, Patriarch of the Maronites, and HB Ghattas, Patriarch of the Copts.

Amado

Dear Amado:

There is no such thing as a Cardinal-Patriach, whaterver people may think or call them.

The college of Cardinals is divided into the following orders:

Cardinal Priest (most of them)
Cardinal Decon (mainly working in the curia)
Cardinal Bishop (those from the suburbican sees of the Roman Metroplitan Province)

Thats it.


defreitas

From an Orthodox view point, an Eastern rite Pope would probably be the worst move the Catholic Church could make. The response from Russia, Greece and other Orthodox countries would be to immediately distance themselves from Rome and to tell the world that they did not accept his authority. It would get worse after that, trust me.

I will be interested to see how the new Pope approaches us. I think that John Paul II improved relations but I don't believe that any real progress in theological terms was made towards being in communion again.

And Russia, Greece, etc. accept his authority now? Where is the difference?

Defreitas:

I said:

This means that the Cardinal-Patriarchs are part of the Order of Bishops and not as a new and separate Order.

And you dismissed the above:

First, let us put the "Orders" within the College of Cardinals in order:

Order of Bishops;
Order of Priests; and
Order of Deacons.

These levels are "orders" of precedence. Thus, within the College, the Order of Bishops comes first in order of precedence.

Within the Order of Bishops, there is, likewise, an "order" of precedence. By tradition, this "Order" has, as of now, a maximum number of 9 members: 6 Cardinal-Bishops of the Latin Rite and 3 Cardinal-Bishops, now referred to as Cardinal-Patriarchs, of the Eastern Rites (Churches).

The Latin Rite Cardinals in the Order of Bishops are first in order of precedence followed by the Eastern Rite Cardinals.

Further, the 6 Latin Rite Cardinal-Bishops elect from among themselves the Dean and Subdean of the College of Cardinals. The Eastern Rite Cardinal- Patriarchs are excluded from the election/voting.

Yes, there might be no such thing as a "Cardinal-Patriarch" in the outside world or in the perception of Eastern Catholics.

But, internally, the College of Cardinals has created a distinction between Latin Rite and Eastern Rite Cardinals WITHIN its Order of Bishops.

I did not make this up.

Amado

Sorry to contradict defreitas, but the Cardinal-Patriarch is a distinct category, and has been since this category was devised for the benefit of Patriarch Maximos IV. His Holiness was not one of the suffragan bishops of the Roman Province, nor a priest or deacon of any church in Rome; he and the other Patriarchs given the cardinalate on that occasion were made "Cardinals of the Catholic Church" and were exclusively Patriarchs of Wherever.

After Patriarch Maximos IV reposed, his successor, Maximos V, let it be known that he would not accept the cardinalate in any way, shape or form. Thereupon, Paul VI committed himself to stop appointing Eastern Catholic Cardinals. This committment did not endure into the reign of John Paul II, who has appointed a few Eastern Catholic Cardinals - the problem seems to be that some of the smaller and less well-known Churches and the heads of these Churches feel that they need the "prestige" of the rank of Cardinal.

Incognitus

Dear Amado:

Sorry if I have offened you but here is what I understand:

Quote:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

"The Cardinals"

"In 1059, the right of electing the Pope was assigned exclusively to the principal clergy of Rome and the bishops of the seven "suburbican" sees. Because of their resulting importance, the term "cardinal" (from Latin "cardo", meaning "hinge") was applied to them.

In the twelfth century the practice of appointing ecclesiastics from outside Rome as cardinals began. Each cardinal is still assigned a church in Rome as his "titular church" or is linked with one of the suburbican sees. Of these sees, the Dean of the College of Cardinals holds that of Ostia while keeping his preceding link with one of the other six sees.

There are thus only six Cardinals who hold the rank of Cardinal Bishop (apart from the few who have held that rank but are now over eighty years of age). The others have the rank either of Cardinal Priest or Cardinal Deacon."

end quote.


Individual presidence is another matter. As far as I can remember Patriarch Joseph (Cardinal)Slipy and the other oriental Patriarchs were given presidence only in processions where they would proceed the Cardinal-Bishops but preceed the Cardinal-Priests.

defreitas

Shlomo Jporthodox,

First, you are making a false assumption in that you think all Eastern Catholics follow the Byzantine Tradition.

Why would the Eastern Orthodox distance themselves from a Pope who was from the Alexandrian Tradition (St�phanos II Ghattas of the Copts), Atiochene-Edessan (Nasrallah Peter Sfeir of the Maronites,Ignace Pierre VIII Abdel-Ahad of the Syriacs, Ignace Moussa I Daoud also of the Syriacs, Varkey Vithayathil of the Syro-Malabars, Cyril Baselios Malancharuvil of the Syro-Malankaras or Emmanuel III Delly of the Chaldeans), or Armenian (Ners�s B�dros XIX Tarmouni).

Both the Eastern Orthodox, and the Roman (Latin) Catholics on a whole seem to forget that there are more than two Traditions.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Dear Nicholas,

I think the first Eastern Cardinal was Metropolitan Isidore of Kyiv, who participated at the Council of Florence (1439?) and was in Constantinople when the Turks conquered it in 1453.

I also know of Metropolitan Sylvester Sembratovich of Lviv, who sent Father John Wolansky and other Byzantine Priests to the United States in the 1880s and 1890s.

John
Pilgrim and Odd Duck