Could the pope throw out the Divine Liturgy?

[mardukm]

Dear brother mardukm, I’m sure you know that I don’t have an “extremist papalist view”, and I wouldn’t mind it if the East and the West came into unity, but I believe it must happen in accordance with the truth. I wish that I could see things the way you do. Please look at my post number 51 above and link there to the new thread I created and make your reply there if you could - thanks!

Thanks, brother! . Sorry for missing that post, and thanks for pointing it out.

I’ll get there as soon as I am able.

Abundant Blessings

 

[mardukm]

ad hominem argument.
Anyway, it is off the topic of the OP. Where did you say that this line of discussion was going to be continued?

It’s not an ad hominem to point out that you have not once addressed the quotes in the links I gave.

Brother JohnVIII started another thread recently, and gave a link to it a few posts ago.

Blessings

 

[bobzills]

It’s not an ad hominem to point out that you have not once addressed the quotes in the links I gave.

Brother JohnVIII started another thread recently, and gave a link to it a few posts ago.

Blessings

Regardless of your personal attacks on me, none of your contentions is supported by Canon Law. On the contrary they are condemned.
The Pope is subject to no earthly authority and he may always and anywhere exercise the full and supreme plenitude of his power over the Church if he chooses. And this power possesses absolute fullness and is both immediate and ordinary and it extends to each and every Church and over each and every one of the clergy and the faithful.
Give me the date and number of any canon law which says that the power of the Pope is limited.

 

[mardukm]

Regardless of your personal attacks on me, none of your contentions is supported by Canon Law. On the contrary they are condemned.
The Pope is subject to no earthly authority and he may always and anywhere exercise the full and supreme plenitude of his power over the Church if he chooses. And this power possesses absolute fullness and is both immediate and ordinary and it extends to each and every Church and over each and every one of the clergy and the faithful.
Give me the date and number of any canon law which says that the power of the Pope is limited.

Read the links I gave, since I give the canons there. :banghead: :banghead: How many more times do I have to say it? Just read the links. What are you scared of? Just read the links!!! :banghead:

Would it be a personal attack if I say you are obviously just being obtuse? Your actions are striking evidence of that. If you don’t want to leave yourself open to such adjectives, you should be more respectful and sincere in this dialogue and actually take the time to read what is offered to you in response.

 

[bobzills]

Read the links I gave, since I give the canons there. :banghead: :banghead: How many more times do I have to say it? Just read the links. What are you scared of? Just read the links!!! :banghead:

Would it be a personal attack if I say you are obviously just being obtuse? Your actions are striking evidence of that. If you don’t want to leave yourself open to such adjectives, you should be more respectful and sincere in this dialogue and actually take the time to read what is offered to you in response.

No. Many of the messages in the links you gave have been erased. Just give us one single passage in canon law which says that the Pope does not have full and supreme disciplinary power over the Eastern Catholic Churches.
The fact is that the Pope does have the full and supreme unlimited power over the Eastern Catholic Churches. This is easily seen by the fact that on more than one occasion, the Pope has rejected the petitions of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the USA to put into place optional celibacy.

 

[bobzills]

Read the links I gave, since I give the canons there. :banghead: :banghead: How many more times do I have to say it? Just read the links. What are you scared of? Just read the links!!! :banghead:

Would it be a personal attack if I say you are obviously just being obtuse? .

Let’s look at the link and some of the posts which Mardukm has recommended that we read:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=185817&highlight=papal+prerogatives
#4: “The Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth. The authority of Christ over the entire Church, exercised through His Vicar, cannot be limited.

This is the basic theological principle and it is amply instituted in the Codes of Canon Law both of the Roman Church and of the Eastern Churches.”
#7: “As for the historical precedents, I cite the history of the Maronite Church (still looking for that thread of mine ), the more recent example of the Maronite delegation to Rome to overturn the ban on married clergy the Pope enacted, and the subsequent decision of Rome which continues this tragic opposition to tradition.”
#15: “The Holy Father has immediate power over the whole Church, even in matters of discipline. As the Eastern Canons read:

Canon 43 The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office (munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise.

Canon 45 §1. The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office (munus), not only as power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both strengthened and safeguarded.

§3. There is neither appeal nor recourse against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff. “
ETC. ETC.

 

[mardukm]

Let’s look at the link and some of the posts which Mardukm has recommended that we read:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=185817&highlight=papal+prerogatives
#4: “The Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth. The authority of Christ over the entire Church, exercised through His Vicar, cannot be limited.

This is the basic theological principle and it is amply instituted in the Codes of Canon Law both of the Roman Church and of the Eastern Churches.”
#7: “As for the historical precedents, I cite the history of the Maronite Church (still looking for that thread of mine ), the more recent example of the Maronite delegation to Rome to overturn the ban on married clergy the Pope enacted, and the subsequent decision of Rome which continues this tragic opposition to tradition.”
#15: “The Holy Father has immediate power over the whole Church, even in matters of discipline. As the Eastern Canons read:

Canon 43 The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office (munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise.

Canon 45 §1. The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office (munus), not only as power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both strengthened and safeguarded.

§3. There is neither appeal nor recourse against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff. “
ETC. ETC.

Those are not the canons I gave. That’s rather dishonest of you. Keep looking. It’s there. Not just one canon, but a whole bunch of them.

In any case, I thoroughly exlained those Canons (that you quoted) in the link I gave. Rather dishonest of you (once again) to not provide those explanations as well (probably because they refute your “absolute power” interpretations).

Blessings

 

[bobzills]

It’s not an ad hominem to point out that you have not once addressed the quotes in the links I gave.

I see what the links have contained. And after quoting directly from the links, you say I am dishonest. This is of course, an ad hominem. LEt me explain what ad hominem means. An ad hominem argument is one where someone attacks the honesty of his opponent rather than respond directly to the argument at hand. Generally, it is used when the person has no real or substantive answer to the objections given.
It is not idshonest to go to the links which you yourself have provided and to quote directly from them. And the links which you yourself have provided quote from the Eastern canons:
#4: “The Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth. The authority of Christ over the entire Church, exercised through His Vicar, cannot be limited.

This is the basic theological principle and it is amply instituted in the Codes of Canon Law both of the Roman Church and of the Eastern Churches.”
#7: “As for the historical precedents, I cite the history of the Maronite Church (still looking for that thread of mine ), the more recent example of the Maronite delegation to Rome to overturn the ban on married clergy the Pope enacted, and the subsequent decision of Rome which continues this tragic opposition to tradition.”
#15: “The Holy Father has immediate power over the whole Church, even in matters of discipline. As the Eastern Canons read:

Canon 43 The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office (munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church which he can always freely exercise.

Canon 45 §1. The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office (munus), not only as power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both strengthened and safeguarded.

§3. There is neither appeal nor recourse against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff. “

 

[mardukm]

I see what the links have contained. And after quoting directly from the links, you say I am dishonest. This is of course, an ad hominem.

No, it’s not. You asked for a canon from me. I stated that I already gave those canons in the links I gave (you identified the correct one - the one to the thread “Papal Prerogatives”). Then you proceeded to give Canons that were not provided BY ME. You obviously have not read the entire thread (again, a measure of your obtuseness), because I gave a whole slough of Canons demonstrating that the Pope does not have “absolute power.”

And if you are going to give canons supposedly proving your own point from that link, have the integrity to provide the explanations I gave, as well, please. Or at least link directly to the page where you obtained those canons so others can read for themselves my explanation (which refutes your “absolute power” position).

Blessings

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Bob,

No, it’s not. You asked for a canon from me. I stated that I already gave those canons in the links I gave (you identified the correct one - the one to the thread “Papal Prerogatives”). Then you proceeded to give Canons that were not provided BY ME. You obviously have not read the entire thread (again, a measure of your obtuseness), because I gave a whole slough of Canons demonstrating that the Pope does not have “absolute power.”

And if you are going to give canons supposedly proving your own point from that link, have the integrity to provide the explanations I gave, as well, please. Or at least link directly to the page where you obtained those canons so others can read for themselves my explanation (which refutes your “absolute power” position).

Blessings

Let’s continue this debate in that new thread begun by brother JohnVIII in the Apologetics Forum.

Blessings

 

[Catherine_Grant]

**Moderator Note: **

This discussion on the pope’s authority within the Eastern Catholic Churches was sufficiently off-topic to create a new thread from it. Please see here for the original discussion on an Orthodox person converting to Catholicism.

May God Bless You Abundantly,
Catherine Grant
Eastern Catholicism Moderator

 

[Antonius_Lupus]

Your original Latin Mass was never lost, AFAIK. Any aberrations in the Mass are due to the experimental tendencies of local priests and congregations, not the Magisterium.

Blessings

AMEN!!!

 

[bpbasilphx]

The Tridentine Psalter was abrogated by St. Pius X; it was completely discontinued.

---

**Are you talking about the distribution of the Psalter in the Breviary of Pius V, which was redistributed at the time of Popes Pius X and XI?

Or are you talking about the introduction of the new Latin Psalter by Pius XII?

In any case, there have actually been several different versions of the Psalter coexisting at the same time in the Roman Rite before Vatican II.**

 

[bobzills]

The Tridentine Psalter was abrogated by St. Pius X; it was completely discontinued.
]

Right. The Pope has the power and the authority to impose a Liturgy as he deems and chooses appropriate. This is indicated by both the solemn declarations of Vatican I and by the current Vatican II catechism of the Catholic Church:
882: “For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”
He can exercise his full, supreme and universal power unhindered. What would this mean except that he does have the authority to change or modify the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Catholic Churches, just as he imposed the rule of celibacy over the objections of many of the Eastern Catholic clergy in the USA.
Is this not a problem with reference to the Eastern Orthodox Churches? Why would they want to submit to the possiblity that their Divine Liturgy could be modified or thrown out and replaced with the New Mass? Why would they want to submit to the prospect of a celibate priesthood? Would they not be suspicious and relctant to embark on any reunion with the Roman Church as long as the Roman Church insists that the Pope by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered?

 

[mardukm]

Right.

That was not bpbasilphx’s point of view.

The Pope has the power and the authority to impose a Liturgy as he deems and chooses appropriate. This is indicated by both the solemn declarations of Vatican I and by the current Vatican II catechism of the Catholic Church:
882: “For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”
He can exercise his full, supreme and universal power unhindered. What would this mean except that he does have the authority to change or modify the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Catholic Churches, just as he imposed the rule of celibacy over the objections of many of the Eastern Catholic clergy in the USA.
Is this not a problem with reference to the Eastern Orthodox Churches? Why would they want to submit to the possiblity that their Divine Liturgy could be modified or thrown out and replaced with the New Mass? Why would they want to submit to the prospect of a celibate priesthood? Would they not be suspicious and relctant to embark on any reunion with the Roman Church as long as the Roman Church insists that the Pope by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered?

The whole problem here is that you are a Latin who thinks that Liturgy is a mere discipline that can be changed easily. That you would compare it to the issue of celibacy demonstrates your ignorance on the matter. I have already told you that the Divine Liturgy is not a mere issue of discipline that the Pope has the authority to change. To Easterns and Orientals (as well as many conservative/traditional Westerns - which you are obviously not one), it is on the level of Sacred Tradition as one of the very vehicles of our Faith, and unless you can give a quote from the Vatican Council that permits the Pope to change or throw out Sacred Tradition, then your arguments are basically null and void.

Blessings

 

[malphono]

Right. The Pope has the power and the authority to impose a Liturgy as he deems and chooses appropriate. This is indicated by both the solemn declarations of Vatican I and by the current Vatican II catechism of the Catholic Church:
882: “For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”
He can exercise his full, supreme and universal power unhindered. What would this mean except that he does have the authority to change or modify the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Catholic Churches, just as he imposed the rule of celibacy over the objections of many of the Eastern Catholic clergy in the USA.
Is this not a problem with reference to the Eastern Orthodox Churches? Why would they want to submit to the possiblity that their Divine Liturgy could be modified or thrown out and replaced with the New Mass? Why would they want to submit to the prospect of a celibate priesthood? Would they not be suspicious and relctant to embark on any reunion with the Roman Church as long as the Roman Church insists that the Pope by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered?

I’ll probably regret opening my mouth in this thread, but I just can’t stand it.

I imagine the above is a problem with the various Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodox Churches, but I have to add that it’s equally a problem for the various sui juris Churches currently in union. If such power were ever exercised, there likely would be throngs of people at the door waiting to leave.

 

[bobzills]

That was not bpbasilphx’s point of view.

The whole problem here is that you are a Latin who thinks that Liturgy is a mere discipline that can be changed easily. That you would compare it to the issue of celibacy demonstrates your ignorance on the matter. I have already told you that the Divine Liturgy is not a mere issue of discipline that the Pope has the authority to change. To Easterns and Orientals (as well as many conservative/traditional Westerns - which you are obviously not one), it is on the level of Sacred Tradition, and unless you can give a quote from the Vatican Council that permits the Pope to change or throw out Sacred Tradition, then your arguments are basically null and void.

Blessings

Once again your argument is an ad hominem one, calling your opponent ignorant. Let me go over with you and others here what an ad hominem argument is. An ad hominem argument is when someone launches a vicious personal attack on the character or intelligence of his opponent, instead of addressing the issues at hand. It is generally done when the person does not have a convincing answer to the arguments of his opponent. Instead of addressing the issues at hand, he says that his opponent is ignorant.
The catechism of the Catholic Church says clearly that the Pope may always exercise his power unhindered. What does this phrase mean to anyone reading it?
“For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”
Can you give us one statement from the Catechism of the Catholic Church where it says that the Pope’s power is limited, or are you simply going to go on about how ignorant everyone else is?

 

[bobzills]

I’ll probably regret opening my mouth in this thread, but I just can’t stand it.

I imagine the above is a problem with the various Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodox Churches, but I have to add that it’s equally a problem for the various sui juris Churches currently in union. If such power were ever exercised, there likely would be throngs of people at the door waiting to leave.

Yes. It is obviously a problem. And it is even more of a problem if it doesn’t mean what it says, because in that case, it hurts the credibility of the Church.

 

[mardukm]

I’ll probably regret opening my mouth in this thread, but I just can’t stand it.

I imagine the above is a problem with the various Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodox Churches, but I have to add that it’s equally a problem for the various sui juris Churches currently in union. If such power were ever exercised, there likely would be throngs of people at the door waiting to leave.

OK, NOW you’ve done it.

I’m not aware of any EC or OC hierarch who goes around expressing this made-up fear of having their Liturgy changed or discarded unilaterally by the Pope.

This scenario is just a pointless philosophical exercise similar to those athiests who ask the question “Can God make a rock he cannot lift?”

I mean, what part of the Vatican’s decree that the Pope must exercise his prerogatives to defend and uphold the prerogatives of his brother bishops would make people think that the Pope has the authority to unilaterally make such a change?

Blessings

 

[mardukm]

Yes. It is obviously a problem. And it is even more of a problem if it doesn’t mean what it says, because in that case, it hurts the credibility of the Church.

Nah! It only hurts YOUR credibility.