An official clarification on the Dogma of Papal Infallibility?

[Formosus]

Dear brother Formosus,

Admittedly, the Congregation on the Oriental Churches is something about which I am almost completely ignorant. I always thought it was an agency set up by the Pope to aid the Oriental Churches, not to control them. I know that curial members were very Latinizing in the 19th century, and often came at odds with the Pope himself over their Latinizing attitudes. But that’s about all I know. Why are you opposed to this Congregation? In what ways do you feel that it violates the self-governance of the Eastern and Oriental Churches?

In the past it has been an agent of control over the Eastern Churches. +Elias Zoghby reffered to it as a “super Patriarch” if I recall correctly. Its a totally unnecessary organization. What right does the Roman Patriarch have to set up an organization like that? It is a relic of a bygone age that represents the former status of eastern churches as mere “rites”.

 

[Addai]

Yes, sister. If you have a good knowledge of the relationship between the Orthodox Churches and the Catholic Church, please do so.

And your comments would be appreciated as well.

On that note, I hope our Eastern or Oriental Orthodox or ACOE members participate in both the poll and the thread.

Let’s keep it at a discussion level as an exchange of knowledge and ideas, instead of a debate.

Blessings

Well in that case I don’t know how to vote,but I’m leaning to say the clarification is just for Catholics. I think Orthodox could benefit a lot. I hear inaccurate things said all the time in the Coptic Church about the Catholics. Unfortunately this would only help if people bother to read and study the document. And I just think lots of priests and other folks aren’t going to bother to take the time to do that; because they seem oblivious to other clarifications of the past. The clarification would be more for Orthodox who are already thinking about “crossing the Tiber”.

 

[Hesychios]

In the past it has been an agent of control over the Eastern Churches. +Elias Zoghby reffered to it as a “super Patriarch” if I recall correctly. Its a totally unnecessary organization. What right does the Roman Patriarch have to set up an organization like that? It is a relic of a bygone age that represents the former status of eastern churches as mere “rites”.

I agree with you.

I once heard a (rather well known) UGCC priest refer to it as the “Bureau of Indian Affairs”! The comment provoked quite a few guffaws in the room.

No part of the Curia at Rome has any authority of it’s own. Whatever authority it exercises, or claims to be able to exercise, is completely deputized from the Bishop of Rome’s authority. That means that it never can do anything without the Pope’s consent, either directly given or assumed.

All diocesan bishops have a curia AFAIK. Since the scope of authority is assumed to be broader for the bishop of Rome, his curia is also larger and exercises wider ranging responsibilities.

I am a firm believer that if there were to be any type of reconciliation with the Orthodox, this particular congregation would have to be closed down, or limited to eastern Catholic churches that have not reintegrated into an Orthodox church.

 

[Hesychios]

I am assuming that the straightforward explanation would be the clarification (since the current text does not appear to be straightforward enough, given all the debates and misunderstandings that arise over it). I’ll leave it to you to determine if it is straightforward enough…

I think a “White Paper” report of the church’s position would be a good start.

It could begin with a brief synopsis, then go point by point explaining Papal authority as already exercised, with reference to the CCC and relevant canons already in place. It should also explain as much as possible whatever is not within the scope of Papal authority and why it is not, with reference to relevant Canons, if possible.

 

[mardukm]

I agree with everyone that the Curia should not have a judicial, legislative or executive role in any of the Churches. I believe it should be a purely consultative body to the Pope as far as his relationship to the Churches is concerned (Obviously, I can’t speak for the Latins).

I disagree with everyone, however, that it should not exist. The Curia is a less formal and more immediate way for the needs and concerns of the Eastern and Oriental Churches to be presented to the Pope. We can’t forget that the Papacy is the only religious body recognized in the political sphere in the entire world. If Eastern and Oriental Churches are being persecuted in their home countries, they have a very powerful voice in and through the Holy Father.

Further, one of its primary functions (if not its most important function) is to oversee monetary and other humanitarian aid to the Eastern and Oriental Churches. It helps the Pope fulfill his ancient role as benefactor of the non-Latin Churches. The Pope not only has a right to help the Eastern and Oriental Churches, but an obligation.

The Curia (and the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, in particular) is not supposed to control the Eastern and Oriental Churches, but is supposed to help us. If it fulfills that function, it has a legitimate right to exist. IOW, we shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

OK. Back to the topic.

Blessings

 

[Aramis]

In the past it has been an agent of control over the Eastern Churches. +Elias Zoghby reffered to it as a “super Patriarch” if I recall correctly. Its a totally unnecessary organization. What right does the Roman Patriarch have to set up an organization like that? It is a relic of a bygone age that represents the former status of eastern churches as mere “rites”.

Assyrian texts from the 1st millenia compare the pope’s relationship to the patriarchs to that of patriarchs to bishops.

So HG Zoghby isn’t inventing a new ecclesiology there.

Roman Ecclesiology places the pope as primus over all bishops, including patriarchs.

That role is best described as archpatriarch. Rome has never used that term, but uses Pope in that manner.