www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West What exactly is our status?

Are we a "Sister Church" to the RCs? Are we a Roman Catholic Church with a funny rite? Are we something in between not yet determined?

If we are a Sister Church are we then only held to the councils prior to 1054? If we are only a "funny rite" why do we continue to tolerate such a status? Do we really have a leg to stand on when we have a someone different understand of our rights vis a vis the Vatican? If we are something in between, what exactly is that?

Forgive my denseness, but I'm getting run over at the Catholic Defenders forum.

Dan L

Dan,

I'm not going to quote anything official; this is just my personal take.

I think of the Eastern Rites as that -- rites. In other words, I think of them as Catholics who happen to have different rituals, traditions, etc. Part of that is from history and politics and so on. But another part of it is a recognition with the Catholic Church of diversity in the midst of unity. As such, I think all Catholics, including the Eastern Rites, are bound to all of the Catholic Tradition including all its councils; therein is the unity. However, the diversity is maintained by official recognition (and now, encouragement) by the pope and magisterium of the various rites and their traditions within the Church. So, in sum, I think the Eastern Rites are fully Catholics who are allowed and encouraged to maintain their own heritage and their own living traditions.

I don't know if that helps, but that is how the situation makes sense to me.

--John

I am not going to express anything official either but I will try to sift from what I understand of official Church teaching i.e. as expressed in the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith's document 'Dominus Iesus' and the clarification it gave on the term 'sister churches'. As a result please dont take my words as doctrine, only the Holy See itself can give anything other than an opinion in these matters. I cannot answer this question only say what I think .

From my limited understanding of Catholic ecclesiology every particular church in the world is a sister church of another church. We live in a communio, a communion of various sister churches. In this light, for instance, the church of Rome--that is the diocese of Rome--is the sister church of not only a major see like Jerusalem but also a smaller See i.e. Denver, USA. The Church Universal as a whole is called Holy Mother Church and we all as sisters exist within her body. However, canonically we dont all have equal status. Tradition placed Rome, Alexandria and Antioch above the others (and their rights were dutifuly confirmed by Nicea I) and then at Chalcedon Constantinople and Jerusalem's honorific titles were made jurisdictional.

Now the patriarchial jurdistictions overlap the concept of sister churches because they seperate the sisters under the authority of a 'big sister' so to speak. For Byzantine's your big sister would be Constantinople, the Patriarch of the North. For a Latin (feels odd calling myself that as an afro-carribean Briton) on the other hand our 'big sister' is Rome. This system of government has often been called the Pentarchy. However, it can be canonically reformed and was between Nicea I and Chalcedon. For example, some of the Antiochene patriarchy was taken away to make up the Patriarchate of Jerusalem etc. Thus using the term 'sister church' in this instance might not ecclessiologically correct. Since a sister church can be granted autocephaly etc.

Whats at stake here is that the sister churches of the Byzantine particular Church are descended not from the Roman Patriarchate but from the Constantinopolitan. I'd say as a result that General Councils of the West arent really relevant to children of the Northern Patriarchy. However, there is one aspect of those Councils and declrations that is evidently very important to the Oriental particular churches and sister churches both East and West: Declarations pertinent to the powers and office of the Papacy. This is because Rome in addition being a sister church to all the particular churches in the world, the Roman church's Bishop was given the keys to the house of David (Isa 22:15-23; Mt 16:13-20). Thus, for instance, the dogmatic constitution of the Church 'Lumen Gentium' would have to be given assent by Eastern Catholics at least where it talks about the extrordinary authority of the Bishop of Rome and the authority of his brother Bishops etc.

SINCE: The Universal Catholic Church is "a corporate body of Churches"
(Lumen Gentium);

SINCE: It "is made up of the faithful who are organically united in
the Holy Spirit by the same faith, the same sacraments and the same
government. They combine into different groups, which are held together by
their hierarchy, and so form particular Churches or Rites" (Orientalium
Ecclesiarum);

SINCE: These "has come about through divine providence that, in the
course of time, different Churches set up in various places by the Apostles
and their successors joined together in a multiplicity of organically united
groups which, wilst safe guarding the unity of faith and unique divine
structure of the universal Church, have their own discipline, enjoy their
own liturgical usage and inherit a theological and spiritual patrimony"
(Lumen Gentium);

SINCE: "All members of the Eastern Churches should be firmly convinced that
they can and ought always preserve their own legitimate liturgical
rites and ways of life, and that changes are to be introduced only to
forward their own organic development. They themselves are to carry out all
these prescriptions with the greatest fidelity. They are to aim always at a
more perfect knowledge and practices of their rites, and if they have fallen
away due to circumstances of time or persons, they are to strive to return
to their ancestral traditions" (Orientalium Ecclesiarum);

BE IT RESOLVED: That "while recommending ecclesiastical celibacy this
sacred Council (Vatican II) does not by any means aim at changing that
contrary discipline which is lawfully practiced in the Eastern Churches.
Rather the Council affectionately exhorts all those who have received the
priesthood in the married state to persevere in their holy vocation
and continue to devote their lives fully and generously to the flock
entrusted to them" (Prebyterorum Ordinis);

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That "where in the West there are no
Eastern priest to look after the faithful of the Eastern Catholic Churches,
Latin Ordinaries and their co-workers should see that those faithful grow in
awareness and knowledge of their own tradition, and they should be invited
to co-operate actively in the growth of the Christian Community by making
their own particular contribution" (Orientale Lumen);

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: A "conversion is ...required of the Latin
Church, that she may respect and fully appreciate the dignity of Eastern
Christians, and accept gratefully the spiritual treasures of which the
Eastern Catholic Churches are the Bearers, to the benefit of the entire
Catholic Communion" (Orientale Lumen);

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That "the Eastern Churches in communion
with the Apostolic See of Rome have the special duty of fostering the unity
of all Christians, in particular of Eastern Christians, according to the
principles laid down in the decree of this holy Council (Vatican II), 'On
Ecumenism,' by prayer above all, by their example, by their scrupulous
fidelity to each other, by working together, and by a brotherly attitude
towards persons and things" (Orientalium Ecclesiarum);

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Eastern Catholic Churches "play
a constructive role in the dialogue of love and in the theological dialogue
at both the local and international levels, and thus contribute to mutual
understanding and the continuing pursuit of full unity" (Ut Unum Sint).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: The Synod Fathers recalled the norms given
by the Second Vatican Council, which recognize that the Eastern Churches
"have the right and the duty to govern themselves according to their own particular
discipline", given the mission they have of bearing witness to an ancient doctrinal,
liturgical and monastic tradition. Moreover, these Churches have a duty to
maintain their own disciplines, since these "correspond better to the customs of
their faithful and are judged to be better suited to provide for the good of souls".
(Ecclesia in America).

John,

I do not believe that we can be held to VCI and still be Eastern Catholic.

Dan L

As for our status as Eastern Catholics, I have at times thought it was, "don't ask, don't tell."

I think you are right but how then do we fulfill Pope John Paul II's request to teach the West about the East?

Dan L

Our status:

Collection of sinners following a regime of prayer and fasting - initiated, established, and handed to us by the Christ, the Apostles, the Fathers, and our ancestors - that, by faith and by empirical observation, we see as profoundly efficacious for advancing our salvation.

Humble sinners justified before God by Christ, working out our salvation with fear and trembling, and with hope in that means to salvation that was handed to us by Christ, the Apostles, the Fathers, and all the Saints.

Or is it our status among men that you are interested in?

Perhaps this is out of turn but why exactly do you feel this way?

Well, nothing prevents us from adopting the position of Patriarch Gregory II Yusuf of holy memory. As to Pastor Aeternus, I recommend two things:
a) read the document with great care, and read some good accounts of the process by which Vatican I passed it (Tillard, The Bishop of Rome, is an excellent book in this topic), and
b) then organize specialists in patristic ecclesiology to re-read Pastor Aeternus, paying particular attention to the document's stated purpose of expounding the Faith as it was held when East and West were in full communion.

Incognitus

Incognitus,

I took this from the abridged version of Pastor Aeternus at the EWTN site. Can you help me understand it in any way but to mean Roman supremacy of jurisdiction? And can you help me understand this in any that would allow for Orthodox-Catholic unity?

2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

Dan L

Dear Incognitus,


Here is an interesting read relative to your aforementioned advise. I hope that you do not find it offensive, albeit very accurate.

Dear Dan,

I hope you are well. Perhaps this maybe of some help as your quote is a development, I'm quite sure.

http://www.odox.net/The%20Papacy%20Guettee%20-%20Kirwan.pdf

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

Dan,

I think the only way for any Catholic, Eatern or Western, to view Vatican I is in terms of Vatican II. I think that is true theologically as well as legally. (Legally, Vatican II began by closing Vatican I, which could not officially close itself due to the political situation at the time.) Vatican I said a lot about papal authority, but it did not addresss the authority of the entire magisterium and the role of the laity. Hence, I think Vatican I read alone gives a distorted picture of the Church: in its structure, authority and roles for clergy and laity. Vatican II corrected that by completing that by addressing the rest of the Church and not just the papacy. That's just my my 2 cents' worth of opinion, but it's how I make sense of it.

So, what is the gist of the people who were opposing you on that other forum ?

--John

Matthew: You make a lovely post at 6:14 on the day of Forgiveness Vespers. Then at 7:25 you post "Guettee" with a "hope" that it is found inoffensive. You know better. The latter post makes a mockery of the former, and makes its close a blasphemy.

Dan, Eastern Christian Publications has a great book, "Vatican Documents on the Eastern Churches" in two volumes and I suggest reading it cover to cover several times.

If you believe in the development of Christian doctrine (i.e. Newman et. al.), then the VII documents Orientalium Ecclesiarum, Lumen Gentium, Unitatis Redintegratio etc. and subsequent documents Orientale Lumen, Slavorum Apostoli, Ut Unum Sint, etc. represent the fullest development ("latest and greatest") to date of the place of the Eastern Catholic Churches and indeed of the nature of the entire Church.