|
0 members (),
280
guests, and
106
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,525
Posts417,643
Members6,178
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
Stuart, Do you hate the Orthodox? Judging from what others say about me, it would appear I hate everybody. Just call me Timon of Athens.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,690 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,690 Likes: 8 |
Although His Beatitude Patriarch Ignatius IV is Peter and his successor in his apostolic see, we do have recourse to higher authority when he, or his/our Holy Synod or any one of his/our bishops err, as their judgements are subject to revison and appeal to superior authority. Last I noticed/checked, i.e. last Sunday, the situatuion was status quo ante that disgraceful nonsense, rather papal (in the Pastor Aeternus, not Alexandrine, sense) and certainly foreign to Orthodox ecclesiology.
Can you quote those "official representatives of the MP"? And can you explain what the Patriarch of Moscow says means more to you than your supreme pontiff, who refers to your Major-Archbishop Sviatoslav as Major-Archbishop? How can your Ignatius IV be Peter when he was appointed by your then Patriarch of all the known Inhabited Worlds, over the native Prince Patriarch Ignatius (for having rejected Chalcedon and the aspersions of the Imperial Court, which the Byzantine Churches supported to gain territory moneys and property from the native Semitic Christian faithful), and the pre-'Patriarch of all the known Inhabited Worlds' appointed Peter - Patriarch of the city of Antioch, of Cilicia, Syria, Iberia, Arabia Mesopotamia, Pentapolis, Ethiopia, of all of Egypt and the entire East, Father of Fathers, Pastor of Pastors, Bishop of Bishops, the Thirteenth of The Holy Apostles - who's unbroken direct successor today is named Gregorios III - accepting Communion with the then Roman Chief Bridge-Builder and High Priest?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,191 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,191 Likes: 3 |
Stuart, Do you hate the Orthodox? Judging from what others say about me, it would appear I hate everybody. Just call me Timon of Athens. I do enjoy humor. It makes a person more human. I love Orthodoxy but do not always love the way some Orthodox talk and act toward Eastern Catholics. Some day we shall be one. One thousand years is surely long enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
I'm with those who believe the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church should take a play out of the Orthodox book and "just do it". Side question: is there such a word as "Orthodozation"? Or, more to the point, if it doesn't exist should we invent it? Now back to ... There is Byzantinization / Constantiopolization - which is what occurred when the Semitic Churches rejected Chalcedon. Indeed, and we've also used "Easternization", "Romanization", and "Melkitization". But I'm not sure any of these are considered "real" words -- except of course for "Latinization" (and "de-Latinization").
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Stuart, Do you hate the Orthodox? Judging from what others say about me, it would appear I hate everybody. Just call me Timon of Athens. As long as I don't have to be Pumba.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308 |
I'm with those who believe the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church should take a play out of the Orthodox book and "just do it". As Father Taft suggested some time back, the normal manner in which a patriarchate is elevated in the Orthodox communion is for a particular Church to announce unilaterally its patriarchal status. Some Orthodox Churches welcome the new patriarchate, others shun it, but eventually (after half a century or so) they all accept the new status quo.
The UGCC should, therefore, formally announce that it is now the Greek Catholic Patriarchal Church of Kyiv, led by His Beatitude Patriarch Sviatoslav. It should change its letterhead and its website to reflect its new status, and it should stop accepting mail addressed to the "Major Archbishop of Kyiv-Halich": "Returned to Sender--No Such Person at This Address. It should cease answering phone calls requesting the Major Archbishop. It should not respond to e-mails or tweets so addressed, either. The Orthodox will howl. Rome will howl. In the end, all will accede because that's just how life is. There comes a time in the life of a Church when it has risen to a level of prominence which justifies patriarchal status. If other Churches, for political reasons, refuse to recognize this, then that Church is within its rights to claim what is its own. His Beatitude will be here this weekend, I will let him know your thoughts  Seriously though, everyone within the UGCC do refer to him as the Patriarch. In our Liturgies he is commemorated as the Patriarch. What more can we do? We announce the visit as the visit of the Patriarch, but the RC-run BC Catholic has covered the event as a visity by the Major Archbishop.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
Can you quote those "official representatives of the MP"? Archbishop Alexander, upon the visit of Patriarch Sviatoslav to the ailing MP Metropolitan of Kyiv, among others. And can you explain what the Patriarch of Moscow says means more to you than your supreme pontiff, who refers to your Major-Archbishop Sviatoslav as Major-Archbishop? I didn't say that. But the "Supreme Pontiff" is free to call our Patriarch what he wills.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
But I do know the Pope certainly isn't calling +Sviatoslav "Auxiliary".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Seriously though, everyone within the UGCC do refer to him as the Patriarch. In our Liturgies he is commemorated as the Patriarch. What more can we do? Something binding on the entire Catholic Communion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
Something binding on the entire Catholic Communion. Constantine's question/answer was "what more can WE do". Since communion with Rome is not injured, as he said, we do nothing except what we are doing, and that is the particular realization of +Sviatoslav as our Patriarch. Rome never approved Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch or Alexandria to be raised to the status of Patriarchates, each continued in the growth and development of each particular church until it was recognized within that particular Church. I'm not sure what you mean "binding on the entire Catholic Communion". Generally that specifically refers to dogmatic issues requiring the intervention of Rome, not discliplinary matters of title.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 839
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 839 |
Seriously though, everyone within the UGCC do refer to him as the Patriarch. In our Liturgies he is commemorated as the Patriarch. What more can we do? Something binding on the entire Catholic Communion. According to their beliefs, that is beyond their compentance, authority and power.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
According to their beliefs, that is beyond their compentance, authority and power. Our "beliefs" are contained in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 308 |
Something binding on the entire Catholic Communion. Constantine's question/answer was "what more can WE do". Since communion with Rome is not injured, as he said, we do nothing except what we are doing, and that is the particular realization of +Sviatoslav as our Patriarch. Rome never approved Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch or Alexandria to be raised to the status of Patriarchates, each continued in the growth and development of each particular church until it was recognized within that particular Church. I'm not sure what you mean "binding on the entire Catholic Communion". Generally that specifically refers to dogmatic issues requiring the intervention of Rome, not discliplinary matters of title. Something binding on the entire Catholic Communion would be a decree from the Pope. I wonder, has there been any concelebrations with other Catholic Patriarchs in recent times? Was the Patriarch of the Ukrainian Church commemorated as such by other Eastern hierarchs?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,690 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,690 Likes: 8 |
The Ukrainian Patriarch would not be commemorated by others unless he was attending or celebrating. I have witnessed Patriarch Sviatoslav commemorated at St. Nicholas Cathedral in Chicago, with Bishop Mar Jacob Angadiath, Bishop John Michael Botean, Bishop Nicholas Samra, Cardinal Francis George, and others - no one batted an eye or objected, or offered correction. In fact, HE Cardinal George referred to HB as Patriarch in his homily.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Seriously though, everyone within the UGCC do refer to him as the Patriarch. In our Liturgies he is commemorated as the Patriarch. What more can we do? Something binding on the entire Catholic Communion. According to their beliefs, that is beyond their compentance, authority and power. Maybe so. In any case, my answer to Constantine's question wasn't meant as a serious proposal.
|
|
|
|
|
