Eastern Orthodox Churches re-entering full communion with Rome: Problems with the hierarchy

[ConstantineTG]

The Orthodox are.

Prove it. Even the Vatican clearly says that “schismatics” is not the proper way to describe the Orthodox. You are alone on this one my friend.

 

[devoutchristian]

Prove it. Even the Vatican clearly says that “schismatics” is not the proper way to describe the Orthodox. You are alone on this one my friend.

They refuse submission to the Roman Pontiff, that is schism. I never mentioned the term schismatics, so that is a Red herring.

 

[SyroMalankara]

At least acknowledge there are levels. Some Roman bishops and priests, I am not going to name names are more “in schism” than certain Orthodox, when it comes to the reality on the ground, no matter who they mention during the Mass.

 

[devoutchristian]

At least acknowledge there are levels. Some Roman bishops and priests, I am not going to name names are more “in schism” than certain Orthodox, when it comes to the reality on the ground, no matter who they mention during the Mass.

Certainly there are de facto schismatics within the Church.

 

[UncleBill]

The Orthodox are.

Its attitudes like this that make me want to break communion with Rome entirely! Disgusting…just disgusting!

I’m so glad my brother that you know so much more than Rome…maybe Pope FRANCIS should step down and you be made Pope.

 

[devoutchristian]

Its attitudes like this that make me want to break communion with Rome entirely!

You’re saying that you’re already partially in schism?

Disgusting…just disgusting!

It disgusts you that I adhere to the Catholic faith?

I’m so glad my brother that you know so much more than Rome…maybe Pope FRANCIS should step down and you be made Pope.

Maybe you should make comments that are at least remotely relevant to the topic being discussed.

 

[Msecc27]

On the matter of schism are all of the Orthodox Patriarchs of Antioch technically not in schism with the Catholic Church, due to Rome and Antioch being the Sees of Peter?

Matthew 16:18; And I tell thee this in my turn, that thou art Peter, and it is upon this rock that I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it;

 

[devoutchristian]

On the matter of schism are all of the Orthodox Patriarchs of Antioch technically not in schism with the Catholic Church, due to Rome and Antioch being the Sees of Peter?

Matthew 16:18; And I tell thee this in my turn, that thou art Peter, and it is upon this rock that I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it;

No. While Peter was the bishop of Antioch for a time, he was succeeded as Pope by St. Linus at Rome.

 

[Schism_hater]

Your characterization that the Pope lords over three Patriarchs of Antioch is extremely offensive to Catholics. In his 1998 address to the Eastern Catholic Patriarchs, Blessed John Paul II said the following:

(see full text: vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1998/september/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19980929_patriarca_en.html)

The late pope speaks of a synergy between Rome and the Eastern Patriarchs - of cooperation and mutual service - not a relationship of lord and subject. You will not find that sort of thinking from any of the modern Pontiffs…

John Paul’s speech is fine, but it is not relected in the official Roman doctrinal pronouncements. Rather, those say that the Pope has full, immediate and universal jurisidiction over the whole church. No “synergy”. Change the official doctrine to reflect what JP II said, and that will be great progress.

 

[ronyodish]

Hey folks…

An Eastern Orthodox Christian who has been born into an Eastern Orthodox family, and was baptized by the Eastern Orthodox Church, is not a schismatic. Such a person, simply following his conscience on what he has been taught about the Eastern Orthodox Church, becomes, therefore, innocent of the charge of schism, because, through no fault of his own, he was brought up in a Church that is not in full communion with the Pope of Rome. I would say that the majority of Eastern Orthodox Christians are of this category, that is, innocent before God on the issue.

However…

A Catholic Christian who has been born into a Catholic family, was baptized by the Catholic Church, knows and understands the Catholic Church to have been founded by Christ, but then decides, out of his own free will, to reject the Catholic Church in favor of the Eastern Orthodox Church, becomes, therefore, a schismatic, guilty of schism. But, if he does not know the necessity of the Catholic Church, and does not understand the implications of what he is doing, then while his conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy is an act of schism, his standing before God is not harmed, because again, he is morally innocent of the act in which he engaged in.

God bless,

Rony

 

[Filii_Dei]

The Orthodox are.

Oh boy.

 

[Aramis]

The current multi-juris hierarchy in the Catholic Church is unacceptable in Orthodoxy. We are also in a mess trying to resolve a similar problem of overlapping jurisdictions in North America among other places. The ideal set by the First Ecumenical Council is a single bishop ruling a single piece of geographical territory. So even the current EC model is unacceptable.

So in the event of a merger, something has to give. I’ve always envisioned that we would have a transition period of having two bishops or two Patriarchs until one dies or retires. Then you have the one left, then after he dies or retires, that is the time you elect a new Patriarch/Metropolitan/Bishop for the united jurisdiction.

Since the OCA and the Russians don’t actively support any solution than folding all the others into the OCA (which, historically, has resulted in absorption, not retention of ethnic rite), it’s unlikely that it’s going to happen.

Overlapping jurisdictions are proof that ecclisological development can, has, and does occur in Orthodoxy. At least, it’s proof of it until everyone breaks communion with those with overlapping jurisdictions…

It’s amusing, in a sad, “what poor self deluded folk” manner to watch Orthodox decry the overlapping jurisdictions of Catholics, while Orthodoxy itself is continuing to use them.

And Orthodox protestations about the papacy’s autocracy when Moscow and Antioch are moving that way themselves. (And Antioch has even deleted diocesan bishops.)

Lex orandi, lex credendi indeed!

 

[Montalban]

Your characterization that the Pope lords over three Patriarchs of Antioch is extremely offensive to Catholics. In his 1998 address to the Eastern Catholic Patriarchs, Blessed John Paul II said the following:

Your denial of papal supremacy is amazing!

 

[Montalban]

There’s currently 5 Patriarchs of Antioch;
3 Catholic:
Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and All the East
Syrian Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and All the East
Maronite Patriarch of Antioch and the Whole Levant
There was a 4th Titular Latin Patriarch of Antioch until the 1960’s.

2 Orthodox:
Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and All the East
Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and All the East

Only if you count all that have the term “Orthodox” as such. The Syriac Orthodox are in a union that is more often called “Coptic”.

However that still doesn’t get over the fact that there are several that the pope leads

 

[Montalban]

Centuries ago. Very, very, very unlikely to happen today. When the canonical Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch returned to full communion with Rome in the 18th century, Constantinople appointed its own Patriarch to replace him, contrary to Orthodox canons.

That’s funny. Where does it say that a schismatic bishop cannot be replaced?

 

[Montalban]

The current multi-juris hierarchy in the Catholic Church is unacceptable in Orthodoxy. We are also in a mess trying to resolve a similar problem of overlapping jurisdictions in North America among other places. The ideal set by the First Ecumenical Council is a single bishop ruling a single piece of geographical territory. So even the current EC model is unacceptable.

So in the event of a merger, something has to give. I’ve always envisioned that we would have a transition period of having two bishops or two Patriarchs until one dies or retires. Then you have the one left, then after he dies or retires, that is the time you elect a new Patriarch/Metropolitan/Bishop for the united jurisdiction.

It also happens here in Australia. Within Sydney are Russian, Greek, Antiochian, Serbian etc. orthodox bishops

I’m not aware of any moves to fix this because the churches are still exceptionally ethno-centric.

 

[Montalban]

Forcing people into to a political union is an example of Christain Caritity?

As I noted in my first post in this thread, Catholics think of these matters as purely political.

That’s why they can slice away at my Antiochian church and come up with three different Catholic-lead bishops of Antioch

 

[Montalban]

They refuse submission to the Roman Pontiff, that is schism. I never mentioned the term schismatics, so that is a Red herring.

On the first page there was a Catholic angry with my post suggesting that three bishops of Antioch submit to the pope.

You guys should get together and work out what your faith actually stands for!

 

[Montalban]

No. While Peter was the bishop of Antioch for a time, he was succeeded as Pope by St. Linus at Rome.

Where does it say this?

In point of fact a pope said that there are three Sees of Peter, and all are one.

*“Your most sweet Holiness has spoken much in your letter to me about the chair of Saint Peter, Prince of the apostles, saying that he himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors… Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one…He himself stablished (sic) the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. Since then it is the See of one, and one See, over which by Divine authority three bishops now preside, whatever good I hear of you, this I impute to myself.” *
Pope Gregory
To Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria Book VII, Epistle XL.

As I noted in a post above you should get your argument worked out first.

 

[Wandile]

Quote