Latinizations imposed from within, whether in an effort to appear “more Catholic”, curry favor, or fit in, are no less demeaning to our spiritual and historical patrimony than those imposed from without.
I would not intend to demean anyone. Why would finding truth within Roman praxis be considered demeaning to anyone? After all isn’t the search and journey in this life why we emulate the practices of the Saints?
Why is it assumed that any Roman practices are adopted for these reasons you mentioned? I would certainly not be opposed to adopting Eastern Catholic practices for their efficacy.
Perhaps American culture isn’t as important to me. Our national mentality is that of a melting pot.
Aren’t we supposed to find the good where-ever it may be?
Couldn’t it be possible that such adoption by Eastern Catholic bishops could happen independently on the merits of the theology or in the light of new understanding of Gods Divine Mercy by the Eastern Catholic hierarchies? i.e.: the Holy Spirit leading into all truth through the unity of the Churches rather than the more shallow reasons you mentioned above.
I understand the sensitivity to change on the behalf of the laity but perhaps instead of coming up with terminology like Latinization, Eastern Catholics should differ to their bishops on the issue.
I see similar disparities though history on the ascent to almost all the Church councils. We are currently enduring the growing pains of Vat II. Perhaps were just not ready. Where are we heading?
My understanding of
autocephaly is that certain bishops in early Christian times were not subject to any patriarch or metropolitan for the cause and advancement of evangelism. They were dependent solely and directly on a triennial provincial synod of bishops and on the Holy See.
I am aware of some modern autocephalous bishops in South America and Darfur for example; because of isolation and oppressive regimes autocephaly missions are necessary to reach out to the indigenous peoples, though these bishops remain under obedience from whence they came.
Should then these Bishops who then incorporate local culture (which should be preserved) and which results in creating new customs then claim a right to become independent from whence they came?
In this understanding I don’t see where Eastern Catholic Churches claim a right to autocephaly aside from preservation of customs and culture as the apostles were united and had an effective means of coming together to settle any matter despite where they wound up on their own travels.
In the simplest terms I can put it, if we are all Catholic shouldn’t we all be together under the same apostles? (Not meaning specifically under Rome or any forced superfluous ritual uniformity or differentiation of rite).
Given modern communications and transportation isn’t a Catholic unity possible for the most part?
Why then shouldn’t all Catholic Churches come together in the Holy Spirit to deliberate together which I would see as no obstacle to preserving respective Churches culture and custom?
Peace.
