After East and West unite, we still gotta define territory

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeepeningFaith
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dvdjs said:
As to the OP:
Metropolia in which multiple liturgicial rites were practiced surely existed in the first millenium. Why not just return to the best practices of that time?
Click to expand...
I agree! Thank you everyone for keeping on topic. This thread isn’t about issues that keep us seperate, but what to do if those issues are done away with. In the first millenium, I don’t think it was ever known that there was more than one jurisdictional Bishop in a territory. There were more than one Bishop, rarely, at times. This was usually due to a dispute, but one had the authority over the territory and the other simply had the rank on orders.

Do people think that going back to the Pentarchy would work fairly well? Yes, I am aware that Russia would have to be appeased. I think more than 1 rite can be part of the same diocese. This is not currently the case however. Also, an issue that I see happening is the fact that if there was 1 Bishop with the authority in a diocese, he could say that that diocese would celebrate in only one rite. The next Bishop could change to another. So basically, does America need to have only Latin Rite Bishops or something along those lines. In regards to the Pentarchy, I think that those territories would go back to one rite.

So really, the main question is, in regards to the modern Pentarchy, where does the Roman Patriarch’s territory end? How about an American Patriarch?! (Scary thought)

I am loving the discussion. Please continue!
 
The Roman Patriarchate would take on its traditional territory, just as all other Patriarchates would with new Metropoli being recognized to fill the gaps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top