Can there be an Eastern Catholic pope?

[twf]

The Fifth Lateran Council and Pastor Aeternus of the First Vatican Council condemned Conciliarism, which placed Ecumenical Councils above the Pope. The Pope (and since this thread is can there be an Eastern Catholic Pope) is the Vicar of Christ, Just as Hyper-Dulia, the honor we give to our Lady, gives honor to Christ Jesus, when we give Her the Honor and devotion She deserves. Giving obedience and accepting the Papal Office, and the Man who holds it as Christ’s Vicar, and Supreme Head of the Church on Earth, honors our Lord, because that is how He set up His Church.

But back to the topic of the thread, the Pope be he raised as a Latin, Eastern or Oriental Catholic man, when he is elected Pope is among other things Bishop of Rome, and Supreme Pontiff of the entire Church. He is the only Bishop in the Church does not need faculties to celebrate in any approved rite of the Church, as he being Christ’s Vicar and Peter’s Successor is the final authority on earth. When our Lord returns we will not need a Pope, but until then, he is the final authority our Lord gave us.

While the Orthodox Churches may not accept this, Eastern Catholic bishops do and did at the First Vatican Council. I recently found a 100 year plus book written by the Archbishop of Mosul, in modern Syria, the book has all of the arguments from Eastern Fathers, bishops and Councils supporting Papal Supremacy in English, the other half of the book are the same quotes in their original languages, Chaldean, Assyrian, Arabic, Greek and Latin. Would that I could read Chaldean Assyrian and Arabic, but at least it has the English, and Latin, and some of the Greek I can muddle through. When I get back from my Lenten Retreat, perhaps I’ll start a thread with some of the English texts

It’s also not accurate to say that the pope is above ecumenical councils. He is a key player. He must ratify all decisions and teaching of a Council, but the College of Bishops as a whole, with and under the Pope, collectively exercise the Church’s supreme authority in this context.

 

[twf]

Excellent question.

There were a number of Greek and Syriac Popes in ancient times. Of course by accepting his election, the Eastern bishop would by definition become a Latin as head of the Latin Church.
Regardless for all intents and purposes the Cardinal Vicar runs the local affairs of the Roman Church.

 

[Bookcat]

Yes - but then he becomes Bishop of Rome…(which is in the west )

 

[Filioque]

It’s also not accurate to say that the pope is above ecumenical councils. He is a key player. He must ratify all decisions and teaching of a Council, but the College of Bishops as a whole, with and under the Pope, collectively exercise the Church’s supreme authority in this context.

After Vatican II the Conciliarist theory of the 16th Century was revived, one of those Spearheading it has been Fr. Hans Kung. The reality is while a bishop or college of bishops (local or universal) teaching in communion with the Holy See teach infallibly, the Pope does not need the agreement of all or any of the bishops to rule the Church. It would be a good topic for discussion in a new thread.

On topic. One of the titles of the Roman Pontiff is Bishop of Rome, he is also Patriarch of the West. But his title and Role is not limited to that. The Pope is Omni-Ritual. He is the leader on earth of all Catholics of whatever rite. Pope Francis while a student in Rome, after his ordination to the priesthood concelebrated the Russian Rite at the Russicum. At that time he needed faculties to celebrate both the Latin and Byzantine Rites. As Pope he does not need those Faculties as he is the Universal Pontiff. We need to see the Pope’s role in the Catholic Context. The Orthodox refer to him as First among Equals, and limit his authority and role to the Latin Church. Catholics see him as the Successor of Peter and Universal Head of the Church, Oriental, Eastern and Latin Rites.

 

[Filioque]

Sadly the same can be said about many Catholics when it comes to the Pope. Add to that those who think every word he utters is infallible and you’ve got Catholics in a nutshell.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Sadly the same can be said about many Catholics when it comes to the Pope. Add to that those who think every word he utters is infallible and you’ve got Catholics in a nutshell.

There are many Catholics who know their faith rather well and do not think that every word uttered by the Pope is infallible nor have such deep ignorance about Catholic teaching.

 

[Filioque]

There are many Catholics who know their faith rather well and do not think that every word uttered by the Pope is infallible nor have such deep ignorance about Catholic teaching.

You will get no argument from me on this point, but mine was that there are many who are ignorant of the teachings of the Church on the matter, including on both ends of the spectrum those who are in the pews every Sunday. But that’s a matter for another thread.

 

[twf]

Historically the title of “Patriarch of the West” has only been used intermittently by Rome, though it has often been a preferred title from the Eastern perspective. The Latin Church today is truly global. Millions of our members have absolutely no connection to Western culture - modern or classical. I personally think that the Pope should have simply “updated” the title to “Patriarch of the Latins”, or something like that, rather than dropping it completely. He is still functionally the patriarch of the Latin Church.