New Bishop for the Eparchy of Newton?

[Paleo_Thomist]

I guess I could use another term, but sorry if it casually offended folks. I have a friend who is normally pretty conservative but he’s of arab descent and he loathes israel. Whereas most of my other conservative friends defend Israel’s existence almost unquestionably. At least from my perspective, it seems odd to defend a people who support sending mentally handicapped and women with bombs attached to them into crowds for mass destruction. On the other hand, I don’t think Israel is the white slate a lot American conservatives would have you believe. I hear rabbis and other orthodox jews spit and assault clergy to and on their way to services. It just seems in my eyes, the Palestinians are the provocateurs. (I’m generalizing only Muslim Palestinians.) But I am trying to understand why my church’s hierarchy says the things it says about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

For the sake of historical context, it should be noted that Arabs -Christians and Muslims alike- inhabited the Holy Land for centuries before the creation of the Israeli state. Modern Israel is a direct result of the efforts of the U.S., Great Britain, and the U.N. in general in response to an internal movement by both displaced and non-displaced Jews of WW2. As a result, Arabs who had been living in the Holy Land for untold generations were forcibly kicked out of their homes and off their lands, just to see their homeland given over to foreigners. To add salt to the wound, the new inhabitants changed the name of the region to Israel and subordinated the Arab populations to second-class citizenry (if they were given citizenry at all) by acts of positive law and military/police coercion. Such subjugation has been the case ever since and continues to this day. In point of fact, all of what I have just described is within living memory as all of this has happened since the 1930’s and 1940’s. Therefore, the Arabs (rightly) see themselves as an oppressed people, a people who naturally long for their freedom.

We in the U.S. support them because it has been the most consistent foreign policy program of the U.S. government since 1948. To this day, we funnel between $4-10 Billion to them annually subsidizing their political existence. To me, it seems odd to want to support a state that positively oppresses Christians (and they do…just ask the Melkites, Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, et al who live there what it is like to be a Christian in Israel).

I’d probably feel the same way your Arab friend does if foreigners came into my country and kicked me out of my home by gunpoint.

 

[AdvanceAlways]

For the sake of historical context, it should be noted that Arabs -Christians and Muslims alike- inhabited the Holy Land for centuries before the creation of the Israeli state. Modern Israel is a direct result of the efforts of the U.S., Great Britain, and the U.N. in general in response to an internal movement by both displaced and non-displaced Jews of WW2. As a result, Arabs who had been living in the Holy Land for untold generations were forcibly kicked out of their homes and off their lands, just to see their homeland given over to foreigners. To add salt to the wound, the new inhabitants changed the name of the region to Israel and subordinated the Arab populations to second-class citizenry (if they were given citizenry at all) by acts of positive law and military/police coercion. Such subjugation has been the case ever since and continues to this day. In point of fact, all of what I have just described is within living memory as all of this has happened since the 1930’s and 1940’s. Therefore, the Arabs (rightly) see themselves as an oppressed people, a people who naturally long for their freedom.

We in the U.S. support them because it has been the most consistent foreign policy program of the U.S. government since 1948. To this day, we funnel between $4-10 Billion to them annually subsidizing their political existence. To me, it seems odd to want to support a state that positively oppresses Christians (and they do…just ask the Melkites, Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, et al who live there what it is like to be a Christian in Israel).

I’d probably feel the same way your Arab friend does if foreigners came into my country and kicked me out of my home by gunpoint.

Now THAT was offensive. No one kicked anyone out. Palestinians left when THEY rejected a two state solution.

 

[Vico]

Re: New Bishop for the Eparchy of Newton?

Who in Rome chooses?

It goes to the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, composed of the people below plus consultants. They choose and present it to the Pope for approval.

HE Cardinal Leonardo Sandri, Prefect of the Congregation
HE Archbishop Cyril Vasil’, (Slovak) Secretary of the Congregation
Mgr. Maurizio Malvestiti, Undersecretary of the Congregation
HB Patriarch Antonios Naguib (Coptic)
HBE Major Archbishop Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, M.S.U. (Ukrainian)
HB Major Archbishop Lucian Mureşan (Romanian)
HB Patriarch Gregorios III Laham (Melkite)
HBE Patriarch Cardinal Nasrallah Pierre Sfeir (Maronite)
HB Patriarch Ignace Youssif III Younan (Syrian)
HB Major Archbishop Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal (Syro-Malankar)
HBE Patriarch Cardinal Emmanuel III Delly (Chaldean)
HBE Major Archbishop Cardinal Mar Varkey Vithayathil, C.SS.R. (Syro-Malabar)
HB Patriarch Nersès Bédros XIX Tarmouni (Armenian)
HE Cardinal Kurt Koch, president of the Council for Promoting Christian Unity

*Pastor Bonus *Art. 58 — § 1. The competence of this Congregation extends to all matters which are proper to the Oriental Churches and which are to be referred to the Apostolic See, whether concerning the structure and organization of the Churches, the exercise of the office of teaching, sanctifying and governing, or the status, rights, and obligations of persons. It also handles everything that has to be done concerning quinquennial reports and the ad limina visits in accordance with arts. 31-32.

 

[Paleo_Thomist]

Now THAT was offensive. No one kicked anyone out. Palestinians left when THEY rejected a two state solution.

Are you referring to the 1940’s? No one offered my extended family the option of a two-state solution. They were offered life out of the home they grew up in or death in the home that was about to be occupied by new owners no matter what. Historical records prove that Arabs, Christian and Muslim, were being systematically kicked out since the 1930’s-1940’s; and the State of Israel does not deny this happened.

Look at it this way. A hypothetical situation. It’s 1948 in Wala Wala Washington. Let’s say you have lived there all your life as well as your family for more generations than you can count. Let’s say another group of people come and tell you this was their land 2,000 years ago, and it should still be theirs. What would you do? Likelihood is you would resist. Let’s say you lose that resistance effort and are displaced to someplace like Yakima Washington, but have less rights than you did before. I bet you would be peeved. Let’s say 50 years later you are offered a two-state solution. You might accept, but your neighbor who is in the same boat might not. Why? Because in his mind he does not want to compromise with an invader. Is it right? I think prudence should dictate his actions. However, I can still understand why he would not comply even if I disagree with his decision.

And by the way, our brothers in the Mystical Body of Christ are getting the short end of the stick from the State of Israel all the time --just ask our Christian brethren who live there. To be fair, they are getting little better from the likes of Hamas either.

 

[Aramis]

PT:
all governments currently in existence took over from some prior civilization. Most by force. Almost all of them also have, at some point or another, exercised immanent domain over one group of people in favor of another.

 

[josephdaniel29]

Re: New Bishop for the Eparchy of Newton?

It goes to the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, composed of the people below plus consultants. They choose and present it to the Pope for approval.

HE Cardinal Leonardo Sandri, Prefect of the Congregation
HE Archbishop Cyril Vasil’, (Slovak) Secretary of the Congregation
Mgr. Maurizio Malvestiti, Undersecretary of the Congregation
HB Patriarch Antonios Naguib (Coptic)
HBE Major Archbishop Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, M.S.U. (Ukrainian)
HB Major Archbishop Lucian Mureşan (Romanian)
HB Patriarch Gregorios III Laham (Melkite)
HBE Patriarch Cardinal Nasrallah Pierre Sfeir (Maronite)
HB Patriarch Ignace Youssif III Younan (Syrian)
HB Major Archbishop Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal (Syro-Malankar)
HBE Patriarch Cardinal Emmanuel III Delly (Chaldean)
HBE Major Archbishop Cardinal Mar Varkey Vithayathil, C.SS.R. (Syro-Malabar)
HB Patriarch Nersès Bédros XIX Tarmouni (Armenian)
HE Cardinal Kurt Koch, president of the Council for Promoting Christian Unity

*Pastor Bonus *Art. 58 — § 1. The competence of this Congregation extends to all matters which are proper to the Oriental Churches and which are to be referred to the Apostolic See, whether concerning the structure and organization of the Churches, the exercise of the office of teaching, sanctifying and governing, or the status, rights, and obligations of persons. It also handles everything that has to be done concerning quinquennial reports and the ad limina visits in accordance with arts. 31-32.

So bishops of other Eastern Catholic Churches select the bishop for their sister Churches and then submit their selection to the Pope?

 

[Vico]

So bishops of other Eastern Catholic Churches select the bishop for their sister Churches and then submit their selection to the Pope?

Those are the primary members of the Congregation for Oriental Churches, but the internal process used within it is not certain to me except for submitting to the Pope.

For those Patriarchial and Major Archepiscopal Eastern Churches that are selecting a Bishop for a territory outside their ancient territory, they submit a terna (three people) from which the Congregation selects one to submit to the Pope for approval.

If the bishop is for within their ancient territory, the Patriarchial Church elects their own bishop directly.

 

[Hesychios]

Those are the primary members of the Congregation for Oriental Churches, but the internal process used within it is not certain to me except for submitting to the Pope.

One thing that bothers me is that the Pope is using eastern bishops as clerks in his staff, although I am sure that this is better than when it was all Latin clerics it is undignified too place archbishops and patriarchs in such roles.

For those Patriarchial and Major Archepiscopal Eastern Churches that are selecting a Bishop for a territory outside their ancient territory, they submit a terna (three people) from which the Congregation selects one to submit to the Pope for approval.

If the bishop is for within their ancient territory, the Patriarchial Church elects their own bishop directly.

I see that this is what bothers the eastern churches.

As I understand it they have recently called for an end to the territorial restrictions (which never applied to the Latin church) set by the Pope on their own jurisdictions. That can only mean that they do not want to submit a terna to the Pope when they desire to fill an appointment.

Of course, this would also allow them to establish their own dioceses as well.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

One thing that bothers me is that the Pope is using eastern bishops as clerks in his staff, although I am sure that this is better than when it was all Latin clerics it is undignified too place archbishops and patriarchs in such roles.
I see that this is what bothers the eastern churches.

As I understand it they have recently called for an end to the territorial restrictions (which never applied to the Latin church) set by the Pope on their own jurisdictions. That can only mean that they do not want to submit a terna to the Pope when they desire to fill an appointment.

Of course, this would also allow them to establish their own dioceses as well.

So Archbishops and bishops do not work on committees for the Holy Synods in Orthodoxy?

I see this as the same thing. These Eastern Catholics are working on curial committees to help out the head of the Universal Church. Just as when an Orthodox bishop works on a committee he is doing so to help out his Holy Synod and/or Patriarch.

Also, no one made these bishops do this work, they were asked by the Holy Father and they assented.

I really do not think that any of us have anything to say in the matter.

 

[Vico]

One thing that bothers me is that the Pope is using eastern bishops as clerks in his staff, although I am sure that this is better than when it was all Latin clerics it is undignified too place archbishops and patriarchs in such roles.
I see that this is what bothers the eastern churches.

As I understand it they have recently called for an end to the territorial restrictions (which never applied to the Latin church) set by the Pope on their own jurisdictions. That can only mean that they do not want to submit a terna to the Pope when they desire to fill an appointment.

Of course, this would also allow them to establish their own dioceses as well.

I believe that this will not be approved in the current era, because of Orientalium Ecclesiarum 3 (from 1964) which states that the ritual Churches are all equal dignity and have the same rights and laws with regard to teaching the Gospel throughout the entire world, under the direction of the Roman Pontiff.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_orientalium-ecclesiarum_en.html

The Congregation for Eastern Churches exercises faculties in accordance with the law (*ad normam iuris) *for the Eastern Churches and has authority over both Eastern and Latin persons residing in South Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Sinai Peninsula, Eritrea, Ethiopia.

I do not know exactly what are the ancient territories defined by the Holy See. A clue may be in the partition of the Roman Empire of 395 A.D., notice that Pannoniarum is in the western partition including capital Sirmium (Sremska Mitrovica, Vojvodina province, Serbia, today) in the most eastern appendix (in red) on the map, Austria, west Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzogivina .

 

[Hesychios]

So Archbishops and bishops do not work on committees for the Holy Synods in Orthodoxy?

I see this as the same thing. These Eastern Catholics are working on curial committees to help out the head of the Universal Church. Just as when an Orthodox bishop works on a committee he is doing so to help out his Holy Synod and/or Patriarch.

Also, no one made these bishops do this work, they were asked by the Holy Father and they assented.

I really do not think that any of us have anything to say in the matter.

Still, I wonder how Roman Catholics would react if the Pope were invited to take a place on an Eastern Catholic patriarch’s curial staff, and he accepted.

 

[josephdaniel29]

Still, I wonder how Roman Catholics would react if the Pope were invited to take a place on an Eastern Catholic patriarch’s curial staff, and he accepted.

 

[KShaft]

I apologize if I have offended some of you. I think this is a conversation better had with my pastor.

It seems you cant but help offend the Eastern Rite guys no matter what you do. Not the ones Ive met in real life mind you, they all seem wonderful; but a good amount on these forums for whatever reason…