Papal prerogatives

[Montalban]

As a romantic notion, this could pass!

Factually speaking, however, the Roman Curia’s life is co-terminus with that of the Pope.

During the interregnum (between the death of the Pope and the election of his successor), the College of Cardinals takes over the reins of governance in the Catholic Church.

The Roman Curia comes to life again if and when the new Pope says so!

Does that mean that they hold the keys?

If yes, then you don’t need a pope, 'cause the Cardinals can hold the keys without one.

 

[Woodstock]

Does that mean that they hold the keys?

If yes, then you don’t need a pope, 'cause the Cardinals can hold the keys without one.

I believe there are three ways recognized as making infallible statements: the pope, the college of cardinals in union with the pope, and the Church as a whole. Someone more knowledgeable on the subject will have to clarify.

 

[Amadeus]

Dear brother Amado,

I partly disagree with this interpretation. The Code of Canons for the Eastern Catholics does not specifically identify the Supreme Authority in the Catholic Church as the Pope. Thus, it could very well refer to the Ecumenical Council, which even the Latin Code admits.

I am not saying it cannot be the Pope. I am just wary of giving that descriptive (“Supreme Authority”) to the Pope ALONE, especially when the Canons state otherwise.

Blessings,
Marduk

Canons 42 thru 54 of the Eastern Code of Canons clearly identifies the Bishop of Rome, aka the Pope, as the Supreme Authority in the Church.

The canons above mirror those of the Latin Code.

In the Latin Code, the Pope is over and above an Ecumenical Council:

Canon 338, Section 1. It is the prerogative of the Roman Pontiff alone to summon an Ecumenical Council, to preside over it personally or through others, suspend or dissolve the Council, and to approve its decrees.

 

[steve_b]

Dear brother Steve,

I’m not sure if you are supporting my statement or contending it.

Blessings

I was thinking of what a Melkite bishop said during a Q & A. These canons were used to support the papal claim as he was making his point. I thought they might apply here as well.

melkite.org/Questions/R-9.htm

As always, thanks for the blessings. Same in return

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Dear brother Isa,

I don’t know why you would say things like this when you know that the Eastern Orthodox have their own internal problems.

…the claim that the supremacy of Rome cures all ills.

As, as Orthodox have stated here in abundance, the Church does not depend nor rise and fall with individual hierarchs, there can be no comparison. The damage a heretic patriarach, let alone as schimatic, can do pales in comparison to that a heretic pope does in the Latin conception of things.

Either Rome can’t control what is going on, in which the much vaunted value for unity comes into question, or it can and doesn’t, in which case we Orthodox will act accordingly to the things we see.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Dear brother Isa,

If you read your quotes in posts #404 and 405 more carefully, you will find it supports exactly what I stated-

That the TRUTH of the Pope’s ex cathedra definition does not depend on consent.

It’s strange for non-Catholic apologists/polemicists to argue otherwise.

Blessings,
Marduk

Your OP, to which I was responding:

However, please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that the TRUTH of Pope Leo’s doctrine required conciliar consent (and this is ALL that Vatican I meant after all). It was simply that for that doctrine to become universal, the consent of the Council was nevertheless required.

According to the constitution and canons (posted by your coreligionists in 414 and 418), no, the council’s consent is NOT required. At all. For anything.

 

[Aramis]

I believe there are three ways recognized as making infallible statements: the pope, the college of cardinals in union with the pope, and the Church as a whole. Someone more knowledgeable on the subject will have to clarify.

not the college of cardinals, but the synod of bishops. Those are not synonymous.

Technically, the college of Cardinals has one and only one corporate power: to determine the Pope.

 

[Woodstock]

not the college of cardinals, but the synod of bishops. Those are not synonymous.

Technically, the college of Cardinals has one and only one corporate power: to determine the Pope.

Good point! Thank you for correcting me.

 

[anthony022071]

Dear brother Anthony,

I agree with you insofar as it is on an issue of defined theological and moral doctrine. But I don’t agree with you on matters of doctrinal theologoumena. It is obviously to the latter that the question refers, for there are NO DIFFERENCES among the Churches with regard to de fide doctrines. Wouldn’t you agree? So I don’t see the reason for your disagreement.

The person who was interviewed did not specify what he meant by doctrines,whether defined or unofficial. In any case,a doctrine from the pope,even if unofficial,should be regarded with something more than respect. It should be considered as coming from the mouth of Peter,just as the church fathers regarded the doctrines of the popes. Who is a local bishop or a local church to contradict the pope and to say that the pope’s doctrines are “incompatible” with the discipline of their particular church? That way of thinking leads to dissent and heresy.
Chistianity itself is incompatible with most of the world!
And what Catholic doctrine is he referring to that says that papal doctrines may be rejected?

Question to Dr. Oliver Kelley

Q: Do the R.C. clergy insist that all the Bulls of the Pope are entitled to obedience?

A: The Roman Catholic doctrine in respect to Bulls from the Pope is that they are always to be treated with respect; but if those Bulls or Rescripts proceeding from the Pope do contain doctrines or matters which are not compatible with the discipline of the particular Church to which they may be directed, they feel it their duty then to remonstrate respectfully, and not to receive the regulations that may emanate from the Pope.

The only head that is above the body is Jesus Christ.Look to I Corinthians 12 for a proper understanding of the relationship of the earthly head to the earthly body - one cannot say to the other “I have no need of you.”

There is also a visible,earthly head to the church. Peter was the head of the apostles,and the pope is the head of the church.

Council of Ephesus:

“Philip, presbyter and legate of [Pope Celestine I] said: ‘We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you . . . you joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessednesses is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles, is blessed Peter the apostle’” (Acts of the Council, session 2 [A.D. 431]).

St. Chysostom:

Peter, that Leader of the choir, that Mouth of the rest of the Apostles, that Head of the brotherhood, that one set over the entire universe, that Foundation of the Church. (Chrys. In illud hoc Scitote)

John VI, Patriarch of Constantinople (715):

The Pope of Rome, the head of the Christian priesthood, whom in Peter, the Lord commanded to confirm his brethren. (John VI, Epist. ad Constantin. Pap. ad. Combefis, Auctuar. Bibl. P.P. Graec.tom. ii. p. 211, seq.)

St. Theodore,writing to Pope Paschal:

Hear, O Apostolic Head, divinely-appointed Shepherd of Christ’s sheep, keybearer of the Kingdom of Heaven, Rock of the Faith upon whom the Catholic Church is built. For Peter art thou, who adornest and governest the Chair of Peter. Hither, then, from the West, imitator of Christ, arise and repel not for ever (Ps. xliii. 23). To thee spake Christ our Lord: ‘And thou being one day converted, shalt strengthen thy brethren.’ Behold the hour and the place. Help us, thou that art set by God for this. Stretch forth thy hand so far as thou canst. Thou hast strength with God, through being the first of all. (Letter of St. Theodore and four other Abbots to Pope Paschal, Bk. ii Ep. 12, Patr. Graec. 99, 1152-3)

 

[Reader_Arsenios]

Papal prerogatives???

"You have the right to remain silent!"



Arsenios

 

[Montalban]

St. Chysostom:

Peter, that Leader of the choir, that Mouth of the rest of the Apostles, that Head of the brotherhood, that one set over the entire universe, that Foundation of the Church. (Chrys. In illud hoc Scitote)

You’ll find St. John Chrysostomon referred to other as this
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=191443

 

[Aramis]

You’ll find St. John Chrysostomon referred to other as this
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=191443

At which point, Montalban, the question becomes the chronology of the citations.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Jimmy,

How can you distinguish the pope and the curia? Doesn’t each document recieve the popes signature?

Sorry I missed responding to this before. The answer is “no.” Each Congregation obtains an acquired right of jurisdiction from the Pope in the area over which they judge and administer. There are a few things which the Pope reserves to himself, and it is only these things which require what is called “specific approbation,” or the signature of the Pope. For the most part, the Congregations of the Curia make their decisions without direct papal oversight. This is why it is important for Eastern/Oriental hierarchs to assert their rights, as well as appeal to the Pope if they feel a particular Congregation is doing something violating their rights.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

. For the most part, the Congregations of the Curia make their decisions without direct papal oversight. This is why it is important for Eastern/Oriental hierarchs to assert their rights, as well as appeal to the Pope if they feel a particular Congregation is doing something violating their rights.

1. Are there Vatican departments which exercise rights over the Patriarchs of sui juris Churches?
2. Which departments?

 

[Montalban]

At which point, Montalban, the question becomes the chronology of the citations.

Why’s that a difference? Are you a proponent of some Christian version of the Islamic notion of abrogation?

If you want to bring history into it then know that John Chrysostomon accepted ordination by men not in communion with Rome.

 

[mardukm]

Does that mean that they hold the keys?

If yes, then you don’t need a pope, 'cause the Cardinals can hold the keys without one.

The Keys are held by the Petrine office of the bishop of Rome alone. The POWER of the keys has been given to ALL bishops, but without the Petrine office, the power would not be here in the first place.

Thus, the necessity of the Petrine office of the bishop of Rome, the reason why as long as the Church exists, the Petrine office must exist, why the Spirit’s guardianship of the Church is at once the same as his guardianship of the Petrine office.

Blessings,
Marduk.

 

[Montalban]

I believe there are three ways recognized as making infallible statements: the pope, the college of cardinals in union with the pope, and the Church as a whole. Someone more knowledgeable on the subject will have to clarify.

My question was not about infalibility, but on the power to bind and loose, which the Cardinals ‘may’ have by virtue that a Pope has died.

 

[Montalban]

The Keys are held by the Petrine office of the bishop of Rome alone. The POWER of the keys has been given to ALL bishops, but without the Petrine office, the power would not be here in the first place.

But if all Cardinals hold the keys, then the office can be vacant.

Else how do they hold them when there’s no Pope?

The chair could be empty

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Woodstock,

I believe there are three ways recognized as making infallible statements: the pope, the college of cardinals in union with the pope, and the Church as a whole. Someone more knowledgeable on the subject will have to clarify.

To be more concise:

1. The Pope when he declares a teaching or judgment ex cathedra.
2. The Ecumenical Council, which is the body of bishops in union with her head.
3. The bishops (which includes the Pope as bishop, not exercising his Petrine prerogative) in unanimity despite being spread throughout the world teaching the same thing on a matter of faith and morals

The “Church as a whole” that you mentioned is subsumed under the first heading, when the Pope declaring a teaching ex cathedra reflects the mind of the Church, not only of today, but also the Church of the Fathers.

I’m glad you mentioned the college of cardinals. From my understanding, the Curia is composed of Cardinals. However, the decisions of the Curial Congregations, even those obtaining explicit approval from the Pope, are not protected by the charism of infallibility.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

I was thinking of what a Melkite bishop said during a Q & A. These canons were used to support the papal claim as he was making his point. I thought they might apply here as well.

melkite.org/Questions/R-9.htm

As always, thanks for the blessings. Same in return

I see. Thanks, brother. I guess all Catholics are on the same page regarding the authority of the Pope on an issue of faith and morals.

However, we are speaking of the jurisdictional authority of the Pope as far as discipline and small “t” tradition is concerned.

At this point, I feel I need to make a clarification. When I speak of big “T” Traditions as distinct from small “t” traditions, I am distinguishing between matters that are necessary for our salvation and those that are not.

I fully understand that Easterns and Orientals both often assign to big “T” Traditions, those customs and laws that have been in the Particular Churches for an immemorial period of time, customs and laws that do not necessarily apply to matters affecting our salvation, but are greatly cherished nonetheless.

I hope this helps my Eastern and Oriental brethren understand where I am coming from when I coin the terms small “t” traditions and big “T” Traditions.

Blessings,
Marduk