www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Pope of What?

If the Orthodox and the Catholic where to reunite what territory would the Pope of Rome have? The west? Well the original Patriarch of Rome did not have the territory of Ireland, Netherlands, etc...

In fact, many of these places where forced into Catholicism post schism.

We are quick to call him the Pope of the West or the Western Church but is this really correct?

Originally posted by Orthodox Catholic:
Dear Ray,

He would be called what he was always called by the Christian East prior to the Schism - Holy Ecumenical Pontiff, Pope of Rome.

The Sixth Ecumenical Council demonstrates the GREAT esteem in which the Pope of Rome was formerly held by the Eastern Patriarchs.

Alex

Originally posted by paromer:
Tony, I heard the phrase at the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom in a Ruthenian BC parish.

Paul

I'm going to venture a little outside the box here. How many apostles were there..12? Is it possible that there may one day be a counsel of 12 instead of a single pontiff? The early church cast lots to replace one of the 12.

Paul,

Thank you. I have heard it there as well. My question is posed in response to "...he was always called by the Christian East prior to the Schism - Holy Ecumenical Pontiff, Pope of Rome."

I am asking where (in what document) does such an apellation reside.

Tony

[Next follows the petition of Eusebius et post nonnulla four petitions each addressed to "The most holy and beloved-of-God ecumenical archbishop and patriarch of great Rome Leo, and to the holy and ecumenical Synod assembled at Chalcedon, etc., etc.;" The first two by deacons of Alexandria, the third by a quondam presbyter of the diocese, and the fourth by a layman also of Alexandria.

Therefore to thee, as to the bishop of the first see of the Universal Church, we leave what must be done, since you willingly take for your standing ground the firm rock of the faith, as we know from having read your true confession in the letter sent by your fatherly beatitude to the most pious emperor: and we acknowledge that this letter was divinely written (perscriptas) as by the Chief of the Apostles

Macedonius declared, when desired by the Emperor Anastasius to condemn the Council of Chalcedon, that 'such a step without an Ecumenical Synod presided over by the Pope of Rome is impossible.'

Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all the holy Churches.

O venerable and sacred head

Ukrainain Catholics: Four Translations of the Divine Liturgy, Some Early Translations
Serge Keleher
Logos: A journal of Eastern Christian Studies
Vol. 39 (1998) Nos. 2-3, pp. 273-275

The liturgical title ascribed to the Pope As one can observe from the 1639 Kiev Leiturgiarion, reprinted in 1996, and from any number of service-books published up until 1712, the liturgical title ascribed to the Patriarch of Constantinople was �Свтїйшагω Архїєппа ншгω Вселенскагω Патрїарха�, which means �our most holy Archbishop the Ecumenical Patriarchю�[23] As dioceses, monasteries, and parishes gradually came into communion with Rome at the Union of Brest and thereafter, they simply applied the two adjectives святішій вселенський, which mean �the most holy ecumenical,� to the Pope In so doing, they forgot that the Pope does not use the title �ecumenical,� during the first millennium the Popes disavowed any such title. This title belongs to the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople.

The correct Byzantine liturgical title for the Pope, as accepted by the Holy See, appears in the Greek liturgical books published at Grottaferrata, which consistently style the Pope �our Holy Father Ν , Pope of Rome.�[24] This form also appears in Byzantine liturgical texts recently published by the Holy See for use in the Pope�s presence.[25]

Without access to the archives at the Congregation for the Eastern Churches it is not possible to be certain why there is this discrepancy between the papal title found in Greek and the papal title found in some Church Slavonic editions published in Rome, but the probability is that Father Cyril Korolevsky, who was �the soul� of the commissions which produced these Church Slavonic editions,[26] enjoyed the more elaborate title for the Pope and took pleasure in using it (in one prayer of the recensio vulgata liturgicon[27] he styles the Pope �Pope and Patriarch of the entire universe�), regardless of the inaccuracy. Translators have failed to correct the error.[28]

This became an issue in 1988, but the argument missed the central point and instead discussed a possessive pronoun. When Patriarch Joseph (Cardinal Slipyj) published the text of the Divine Liturgy in Ukrainian, he retained the inaccurate papal title but at least dropped the possessive наш[29] which Father Cyril Korolevsky had attached to it in the 1940 liturgicon and later editions. For about a dozen years this minor but welcome improvement was allowed to stand unchallenged. The possessive pronoun was restored, however, in the 1988 Ukrainian translation.

Bishop Innocent (Lototsky) of Chicago requested Father Andrew Onuferko, then a deacon at Saints Volodymyr and Olha Catholicon, to prepare a critique of the 1988 Ukrainian translation. In his critique, Father Andrew deprecated the restoration of the possessive pronoun, on the ground that describing a particular hierarch as simultaneously �universal� [вселенський] and �ours� [наш] implies both a limit on universality and the existence somewhere of some other �universal hierarch� who, despite being �universal,� is nevertheless not �ours.�

Metropolitan Stephen Sulyk of Philadelphia responded that the Patriarch of Constantinople is styled �вселенський� but is not �ours� [наш] in that the Ukrainian Catholic Church is not in communion with him and does not accept his jurisdiction.[30] Neither Father Andrew nor Metropolitan Stephen seem to have noticed that the style �вселенський� belongs exclusively to the Patriarch of Constantinople and does not mean �universal� in the normal sense; �Ecumenical� in this context is an honorific given to certain high officials of the Imperial court at Constantinople.

=====

[23] Leiturgiarion (Kiev Monastery of the Caves, 1639, reprinted Fairfax-L�viv-New York, 1996), 304 and elsewhere.
[24] Cf, for example, Η ΘΕΙΑ ΛΕIΤΟΥΡГІΑ TOY EN ΑГІΟΙΣ ΠΑΤΡΟΣ ΗΜΩΝ ΙΩΑΝΝΟY TOY ΧΡYΣΟΣΤΟΜΟY � La Divine Liturgie de notre P�re S. Jean Chrysostome, Dom Placide de Meester, transl. and ed., (Rome: Typographie Polyglotte Vaticane, 1925), p. 78; and ΛΕIΤΟΥΡГІΑ TOY EN ΑГІΟΙΣ ΠΑΤΡΟΣ ΗΜΩΝ ΙΩΑΝΝΟY TOY ΧΡYΣΟΣΤΟΜΟY La Divina Liturgia del santo nostro Padre Giovanmi Crisostomo (Rome, 1967), p. 114.
[25] Liturgie dell�Oriente Cristiano a Roma nell�Anno Mariano 1987-88, Libreria Editrice Vaticana 1990, pp. 12 (Italian), 25 (Italian), 33 (Greek), 365 (Church Slavonic), 453 (Church Slavonic), and 463 (Church Slavonic).
[26] Eugene Cardinal Tisserant, [Biographical Note concerning Father Cyril Korolevsky], in Korolevsky, Metropolite Andre Szeptyckyj, Opera Theologic� Societatis Scientiflc� Ucrainorum, vol. XVI-XVII (Rome, 1964), xxiv. Tisserant�s biographical note on Korolevsky was written in 1964 at the request of Patriarch Joseph [Cardinal Slipyj].
[27] Божественная лїтургіа иже во святыхъ отца нашегω Іωанна Златоустагω (Rome, 1941, reprinted Graz, 1962), 158-159.
[28] It could be argued that it is not for translators to correct errors, just as translators of the Bible are not entitled to tamper with the sacred text to suit their own ideas of what is correct. However, the Greek text of the Divine Liturgy is normative until proven otherwise in specific cases (such as cases in which the Church Slavonic text represents an older original).
29 Cf the prayer-book Господи, до Тебе возношу душу мою, Rome 1976.
30 Father Andrew Onuferko�s critique and Metropolitan Stephen Sulyk�s response have never been published, but were circulated widely at the time.

Originally posted by KO63AP:
the probability is that Father Cyril Korolevsky, who was �the soul� of the commissions which produced these Church Slavonic editions,[26] enjoyed the more elaborate title for the Pope and took pleasure in using it (in one prayer of the recensio vulgata liturgicon[27] he styles the Pope �Pope and Patriarch of the entire universe�), regardless of the inaccuracy. Translators have failed to correct the error.[28]