More questions for Eastern Catholics

[MorEphrem]

Being subject to someone does not make that person or authority your king. It just means they have a certain degree of authority over you.

Please look at my post though. Yes, arguing by technicality of the word one could mean having some kind of authority, but in modern English when we say that something has been subjected it has the connotation of total submission, hence why I said it’s a coarse term perhaps spoken in excitement. Nonetheless, the general Western interpretation of this Papal subjection is all-encompassing and total whereas the East views it in a primacy manner; the bishop of Rome is supposed to exercise his authority in a Pauline way, which Pope Benedict understood very well - other popes, however, have not been so “precise” in their execution of authority.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Well … I’ve mentioned this before, but in the Syriac Churches (both Eastern & Western), there are those who hold that the action is not completed until the Rite of Fraction. I think a similar concept exists among the Copts. That’s not to say the Rite of Fraction itself is consecratory, but simply that without it, the action is incomplete.

Absolutely, the Latin Church also requires that a priest consume the Sacred Species for the Sacrifice to be complete. If you watch the OF Mass on EWTN, they ring the bell after the priest consumes the PB for this reason.

 

[Domnall]

the bishop of Rome is supposed to exercise his authority in a Pauline way, which Pope Benedict understood very well - other popes, however, have not been so “precise” in their execution of authority.

Yes, indeed. I do remember the famous anecdote about a 20th century pope and a Mellkite patriarch…