|
0 members (),
259
guests, and
59
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,467
Posts417,239
Members6,106
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 477
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 477 |
I promised a while back that I would document my sources for my comments concerning the Melkites. These two papers are obtained here. [ mliles.com] "Eastern Catholic Churches: Window between East and West" His speech at the Orientale Lumen Conference, June 3-6, Washington, DC East and West [ mliles.com] "From Unia to Koinonia" His speech at the Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, CT, where His Beatitude was conferred an Honorary Doctoral Degree on May 28 Unia to Koinoinia [ mliles.com] Intervention at 2001 Synod in Rome Synod 2001 [ vatican.va] H.B. Gr�goire III LAHAM, B.S., Patriarch of Antioch for the Greek-Melchites, Syria It is incorrect to include the Patriarchal Synod under the title of Episcopal Conferences. It is a completely distinct organism. The Patriarchal Synod is the supreme instance of the Eastern Church. It can legislate, elect bishops and Patriarchs, cut off those who differ. In No. 75, a "particular honor" given to Patriarchs is mentioned. I would like to mention that this diminishes the traditional role of the Patriarch, as well as speaking about the honor and privileges of the Patriarchs in ecclesiastical documents. It is not a question of honor, of privileges, of concessions. The patriarchal institution is a specific entity unique in Eastern ecclesiology. With all respect due to the Petrine ministry, the Patriarchal ministry is equal to it, "servatis servandis", in Eastern ecclesiology. Until this is taken into consideration by the Roman ecclesiology, no progress will be made in ecumenical dialogue. Furthermore, the Patriarchal ministry is not a Roman creation, it is not the fruit of privileges, conceded or granted by Rome. Such a concept can but ruin any possible understanding with Orthodoxy. We claim this also for our Patriarchal Melkite Church and for all our Eastern Catholic Churches. We have waited too long to apply the decrees of Vatican Council II and the Encyclicals and letters by the Popes, and notably by Pope John Paul II. Because of this the good will of the Church of Rome loses credibility regarding ecumenical dialogue. We can see the opposite occurring: the CCEO has ratified uses absolutely contrary to Eastern tradition and ecclesiology! Petrine Ministry and Patriarchal ministry We are the Church of Islam and explanation of 2001 Synod remarks [ 30giorni.it] Recent remarks on Islam and communion with the Pope With Jesus in the midst of Islam [ 30giorni.it]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 |
Chelsea,
This is a great post, with wonderful articles written by the Melkite Patriarch.
I must say that on almost every issue I agree with the Melkite Patriarch, and especially when he says that the Western Councils cannot be recognized as "ecumenical."
God bless,
Todd
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 477
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 477 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 87
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 87 |
what does servatis servandis mean?
Those both come from verb forms.
In Latin the pope is the "servus servorum Dei"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 179
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 179 |
From my Catholic perspective, it remains puzzling and unclear what it is that Patriarch Laham seeks that is in keeping with normative Catholic teaching and tradition.
Particularly stark and paradoxical is his call that Second Vatican Council's decrees be implemented, not seeming to recognize that this entails the restating of Papal Universal Supremacy, Papal Infallbility, and the reaffirmation of the Ecumenical councils of Florence and Trent, placing them on a part with Nicea II.
Best to all,
Robster
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 80
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 80 |
Robster I agree with you. I am very confused....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
Particularly stark and paradoxical is his call that Second Vatican Council's decrees be implemented, not seeming to recognize that this entails the restating of Papal Universal Supremacy, Papal Infallbility, and the reaffirmation of the Ecumenical councils of Florence and Trent, placing them on a part with Nicea II. Says who(m) in which Magesterial documents? And whose definition of "normative Catholic teaching" that seems to apply to Eastern Catholics? Orientalium Dignitas, Orientalium Ecclesiarum, Orientale Lumen, etc. certainly do not support the above statement. Councils that only have significance to Latins have limited significance to Eastern Catholics to whom they were never addressed in the first place. That would seem to be simple logic. No councils will likely ever be "on par" (I assume that was your intended phrase) with the first seven - I would like to see a direct Magesterial proclamation that has placed all of these alleged to be "on par" with Nicea II. Wisely the Fathers of the Union of Brest avoided both the decrees of the Councils of Trent and Florence with the blessing of Rome: ...we ask that we should not be compelled to any other creed but that we should remain with that which was handed down to us in the Holy Scriptures, in the Gospel, and in the writings of the holy Greek Doctors... As a Ukrainian Greek Catholic that IS my basis of union with Rome. Rome has not asked me for any more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
I know that this has been referenced here before but it is worth quoting again, the Letter of the Congregation of Eastern Churches, signed by Cardinal Ratzinger on the Zoghby Initiative. Congregation for the Eastern Churches Prot. No. 251/75
June 11, 1997
His Beatitude Maximos V HAKIM
Greek-Melkite Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and of all the East, of Alexandria and of Jerusalem.
Your Beatitude,
The news of the project for "rapprochement" between the Greek-Melkite Catholic Patriarchate and the Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch has given rise to various echoes and comments in the public opinion.
The Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith, the Congregation for the Eastern Churches, and the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity have made an effort to study and closely examine the areas which fall within their competence in this domain; and the heads of these Dicasteries have been charged by the Holy Father to express some considerations to Your Beatitude.
The Holy See is greatly interested in and encourages initiatives which favor the road to a complete reconciliation of the Christian Churches. She appreciates the motivation behind the efforts undertaken for several decades by the Greek-Melkite Catholic Patriarchate, which is trying to hasten the coming of this full communion so greatly desired. The Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches recognizes the duty for every Christian (Can. 902), which becomes for the Eastern Catholic Churches a special duty (munus) (Can. 903), whose exercise will be governed "through special norms of particular law while the Roman Apostolic Church functions as the moderator for the universal church" (Can. 904).
This is all the more true for two communities which see themselves as being closely united because of the ties of common origin and common ecclesiastical tradition, as well as by a long experience of common initiatives which no doubt place them into a privileged situation of proximity.
The Church's desire is to find adequate ways and means to progress further along the road of brotherly understanding and, to encourage new structures which further such progress towards full communion.
Pursuing such goals, Your Patriarchate is motivated by a sensibility and a knowledge of the situation and an experience which are peculiarly its own. The Holy See desires to contribute to this process by expressing some considerations which she believes will eventually help the future progress of this initiative.
The Dicasteries involved appreciate very much that common pastoral initiatives are undertaken by Catholics and Orthodox, according to the instructions found in the Directory for the application of the principles and norms for Ecumenism, especially in the areas of Christian formation, of education, a common effort in charity, and for the sharing of prayer when this is possible.
As to experiences of a theological nature, it is necessary to labor patiently and prudently, without precipitation, in order to help both parties to travel along the same road.
The first level in this sharing concerns the language and the categories employed in the dialogue: one must be very careful that the use of the same word or the same concept is not used to express different points of view and interpretations of a historical and doctrinal nature, nor lends itself to some kind of oversimplification.
A second level of involvement necessitates that the sharing of the content of the dialogue not be limited only to the two direct participants: the Patriarchates of the Catholic Greek-Melkites and the Orthodox of Antioch, but that it involve the Confessions with whom the two Patriarchates are in full communion: the Catholic communion for the former and the Orthodox for the latter. Even the Orthodox ecclesiastical authorities of the Patriarchate of Antioch have brought forth a similar preoccupation. This global implication also will permit averting the risk that some initiatives, meant to promote the full communion at the local level, might give rise to a lack of understanding or suspicions beyond the generosity of the intentions.
Now we consider the elements contained in the profession of faith of his Excellency Kyr Elias Zoghby, Greek-Melkite Catholic Archbishop emeritus of Baalbek, signed in February 1995, and to which numerous hierarchs of the Greek-Melkite Catholic Synod have adhered.
It is clear that this Patriarchate is an integral part of the Christian East whose patrimony it shares. As to the Greek-Melkite Catholics declaring their complete adhesion to the teaching of Eastern Orthodoxy, it is necessary to take into account the fact that the Orthodox Churches today are not in full communion with the Church of Rome, and that this adhesion is therefore not possible as long as there is not a full correspondence in the profession and exercise of the faith by the two parties. Besides, a correct formulation of the faith necessitates a reference not only to a particular Church, but to the whole Church of Christ, which knows no frontiers, neither in space nor in time.
On the question of communion with the Bishops of Rome, we know that the doctrine concerning the primacy of the Roman Pontiff has experienced a development over time within the framework of the explanation of the Church's faith, and it has to be retained in its entirety, which means from its origins to our day. One only has to think about what the first Vatican Council affirmed and what Vatican Council II declared, particularly in the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium Num. 22 and 23, and in the Decree on ecumenism Unitatis Redintegratio Number 2.
As to the modalities for exercising the Petrine ministry in our time, a question which is distinct from the doctrinal aspect, it is true that the Holy Father has recently desired to remind us how "we may seek--together, of course--the forms in which this ministry may accomplish a service of love recognized by all concerned" (Ut unum sint, 95); however, if it is legitimate to also deal with this on a local level, it is also a duty to do this always in harmony with a vision of the universal Church. Touching this matter, it is appropriate to be reminded that in any case, "The Catholic Church, both in her praxis and in her solemn documents, holds that the communion of the particular Churches with the Church of Rome, and of their Bishops with the Bishop of Rome, is--in God's plan--an essential requisite of full and visible communion" (Ut unum sint, 97).
As to the various aspects of communicatio in sacris, it is necessary to maintain a constant dialogue in order to understand the meaning of the current regulation in force, in the light of underlying theological presuppositions; premature, unilateral initiatives are to be avoided, where the eventual results may not have been sufficiently considered, they could produce serious consequences for other Eastern Catholics, especially for those living in the same region.
In summary, the fraternal dialogue undertaken by the Greek-Melkite Catholic Partriarchate will be better able to serve the ecumenical dialogue to the degree that it strives to involve the entire Catholic Church to which it belongs in the maturing of new sensitivities. There is good reason to believe that the Orthodox in general so share the same worry, due also to the obligations of communion within their own body.
The Dicasteries involved are ready to collaborate in order to further the exchange of verifications and echoes; they express their satisfaction for these meetings which have been held on this subject with the representatives of the Greek-Melkite Catholic Church, and they hope and wish that these meetings continue and intensify in the future.
Not doubting at all that Your Beatitude would want to share these ideas, we beg you to accept the expression of our fraternal and cordial greetings.
Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Achille Card. Silvestrini
Edward Card. Cassidy
http://www.cin.org/east/melkite.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
And I call your attention to this paragraph:
On the question of communion with the Bishops of Rome, we know that the doctrine concerning the primacy of the Roman Pontiff has experienced a development over time within the framework of the explanation of the Church's faith, and it has to be retained in its entirety, which means from its origins to our day. One only has to think about what the first Vatican Council affirmed and what Vatican Council II declared, particularly in the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium Num. 22 and 23, and in the Decree on ecumenism Unitatis Redintegratio Number 2.
To me it can't be any clearer. As far as Rome is concerned, the expectation is that Eastern Christians in communion with Rome will subscribe fully to the decrees of Vatican I & II. With all due respect to Archbishop Elias Zoghby (whom I admire very much), I do not think that you can honestly be in communion with Rome and reject the Roman dogmas concerning the Papacy as stated in Vatican 1 & 2. I love the Melkite Church dearly, but this is the principle reason that I became Orthodox.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
and Trent and Florence and Lyons, etc. View of the Post-Schism Councils: Must we Eastern Catholics consider the post-schism General Councils of the Roman Church Ecumenical like the Seven of the First Millennium?
Bishop John's Answer: Patriarch Gregory II Youssef-Sayour occupied the Melkite throne of Antioch for thirty-three years (1864-1897). At Vatican I, the Patriarch gave an impassioned plea to the assembled bishops in defense of the prerogatives of the ancient patriarchs. He said: "The Eastern Church attributes the highest and most complete power to the Pope, but in such a way that the fullness of his power is in harmony with the rights of the other Patriarchal Sees. (Mansi 52,cols. 133-137). Patriarch Gregory finally signed the document Pastor aeternus but only after adding the phrase made famous at the earlier Council of Florence that expressed his reservations. He added: "salvis omnibus iuribus et privilegiis patriarcharum". {saving all of the rights and privileges of the patriarchs}.
While the first seven ecumenical councils enjoy a place of prominence, especially in the East, both the Churches of the East and West have experienced local councils and synods throughout their rich histories. The early ecumenical councils met to resolve and articulate important Christological doctrines. The Melkite Church participated fully in Vatican I and Patriarch Gregory spoke clearly to his affirmation of the fullness of power enjoyed by the Petrine Office. The Patriarch was very concerned that the exercise of papal powers be "in harmony with the rights of the other Patriarchal Sees." The second Vatican Council is seen to have completed the unfinished business of Vatican I with its special emphasis on ecclesiology, specifically on the nature of the Church.
Recent theological speculation has developed the concept of "communion of churches" with promising results for ecumenism and rapprochement with the Orthodox. It would be a simple rekindling of the old controversy of conciliarism to suggest that some councils are less ecumenical than others. With the promulgation of the Holy Father, the doctrinal content of the various councils is a part of the sacred magisterial teaching of the Church to which Melkites in full communion with the See of Rome give wholehearted assent.
Last edited by AMM; 11/11/07 09:41 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 |
From the Melkite websites catechetical materials: 8 How many Ecumenical Councils were held?
a. Seven Ecumenical Councils
9 Was the Vatican council an ecumenical council? Why?, why not?
a. The Vatican council was not an ecumenical council � no participation from the Orthodox [ melkite.org]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 |
I am reminded of the words of Archbishop Zoghby, who said: ". . . valid or not, Vatican I has the same designation as the Council of Lyons, a 'general' synod of the West. With this designation it is neither ecumenical nor infallible and could produce only theological opinions that can not be imposed on anyone" [Elias Zoghby, Ecumenical Reflections, Eastern Christian Publications, 1998].
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 |
I know that this has been referenced here before but it is worth quoting again, the Letter of the Congregation of Eastern Churches, signed by Cardinal Ratzinger on the Zoghby Initiative. . . . Regardless of what then Cardinal Ratzinger said in response to the Zoghby Initiative [geocities.com], the Melkite Holy Synod has not repudiated the Initiative, and in fact the Ravenna Document [geocities.com] shows that even Cardinal Kasper -- along with the other members of the Roman Catholic delegation to the official dialogue commission established between the Roman Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches -- accepts the fact that the fourteen Latin synods are not ecumenical.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
I know that this has been referenced here before but it is worth quoting again, the Letter of the Congregation of Eastern Churches, signed by Cardinal Ratzinger on the Zoghby Initiative. . . . Regardless of what then Cardinal Ratzinger said in response to the Zoghby Initiative [geocities.com], the Melkite Holy Synod has not repudiated the Initiative, and in fact the Ravenna Document [geocities.com] shows that even Cardinal Kasper -- along with the other members of the Roman Catholic delegation to the official dialogue commission established between the Roman Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches -- accepts the fact that the fourteen Latin synods are not ecumenical. This is what I find so confusing about all of these ecumenical talks. The Orthodox are often criticized for not speaking with a single voice, yet it seems to me that even the Vatican does not speak with a single voice (or at least doesn't speak with an unambiguous voice) and then when you add the viewpoints of eastern Catholics and Catholic theologians outside of the Vatican, you have a cacophony of voices. The idea that there is unity of mind in Catholicism while there is not in Orthodoxy seems to be somewhat of an illusion to me. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
I would tend to put more stock in the words of Cardinal Ratzinger than the Melkite Catechetical Challenge Questions - Grades 9 through 12.
|
|
|
|
|
