|
0 members (),
350
guests, and
122
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,523
Posts417,632
Members6,176
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2021
Posts: 56 Likes: 12
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2021
Posts: 56 Likes: 12 |
@ajk Rome "does" need to be put in its rightful place, as centuries of persecution and forced latinizations have proven throughout history. And it's not about "reducing" Rome. It's about helping Rome grasp her authoritative role properly, without all the excess and innovation she attached for herself over the millennia. What Pastor Aeturnus describes at Vatican I is absolutely alien to the Patristic Church and entire first millennium (and arguably some, maybe even most, of the second). Roman Catholics continue to live and operate under these false assumptions that the Pope is the head of the Church and can do whatever he likes, irrespective of canonical boundaries. That is not true and he cannot act in such ways (the imposition of the eastern code of canon law being a prime example, or how Rome appoints Eastern Bishops outside of their native territories). Rome cannot call on us to reclaim our rightful patrimony and then continue to meddle in our affairs, taking the lawful authority of Eastern patriarchs and adding its own made up powers and authority in the process.
My only priority is for the Byzantine Catholic Churches to shake off everything and anything Roman and fully reclaim their Orthodox heritage and patrimony.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,766 Likes: 30
John Member
|
|
John Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,766 Likes: 30 |
This thread has wandered greatly from its original topic. I don’t have the time right now, but it needs to be broken into two threads.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,398 Likes: 33
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,398 Likes: 33 |
@ajk Rome "does" need to be put in its rightful place, as centuries of persecution and forced latinizations have proven throughout history. And it's not about "reducing" Rome. It's about helping Rome grasp her authoritative role properly, without all the excess and innovation she attached for herself over the millennia. What Pastor Aeturnus describes at Vatican I is absolutely alien to the Patristic Church and entire first millennium (and arguably some, maybe even most, of the second). Roman Catholics continue to live and operate under these false assumptions that the Pope is the head of the Church and can do whatever he likes, irrespective of canonical boundaries. That is not true and he cannot act in such ways (the imposition of the eastern code of canon law being a prime example, or how Rome appoints Eastern Bishops outside of their native territories). Rome cannot call on us to reclaim our rightful patrimony and then continue to meddle in our affairs, taking the lawful authority of Eastern patriarchs and adding its own made up powers and authority in the process.
My only priority is for the Byzantine Catholic Churches to shake off everything and anything Roman and fully reclaim their Orthodox heritage and patrimony. Then your priority is an affront to the BCC, its history, its own path and those who walked it, and the communion ecclesiology of the Church catholic. The BCC needs to be itself, not some concocted version of being eastern or Orthodox, as though that is its obvious role in becoming true. Your way of thinking promotes an inferiority complex, that the BCC must strive to be like others in order to be legitimate. There's plenty of blame to be placed on Rome but there's plenty to go around to others too, a part of the whole truth that you neglect. What Eastern Church is objecting -- has objected -- to the CCEO? Provide a link to some official or significant objection -- not some priest's opinion. You have not grasped the absurdity of your position that is an argument for power and autonomy as the measure of legitimacy. So I repeat it: Poor old Rome, now put in its rightful place, reduced to just "declaring dogmas or officially condemning errors."
I suggest you rethink your priorities. So you say, Rome, declare dogmas and condemn errors about the most sublime spiritual truths since that is your God-given right -- but don't think for a minute you can name our bishop!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,398 Likes: 33
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,398 Likes: 33 |
This thread has wandered greatly from its original topic. I don’t have the time right now, but it needs to be broken into two threads. I am feeling the drift too. On topic Well we're "supposed" to be self governing. Outside of declaring a dogma, the Pope has no authority over the Eastern Churches, other than what they voluntarily cede to him (which itself is an abuse, and one that Vatican II addressed when it called on the Eastern Churches to shake off latinizations and reclaim their Eastern patrimony). Wherever you got this information or impression, it is quite wrong. You have been listening to the wrong voices, ones that too easily equate power with identity, and territoriality with ecclesiology. The BCC needs to, and has it in its own self-determination, to finally get over the boogeyman of "latinizations." Is the abridgement of the liturgy in the 2007 liturgicon, for example, not a kind of "low Mass" mentality? So, Ruthenian1988, what about the your initial post A change in the Divine Liturgy? and my direct "low Mass" question about it, the liturgy, and not whether 'we're "supposed" to be self governing'?
|
|
|
|
|
