Pope Francis: ‘Status quo must be maintained’ for Eastern Catholics and Orthodox

[Prodigal1984]

When asked in Romania whether Greek Catholics should just choose the Latin or Greek worship and whether it made sense to be a Greek Catholic anymore, Francis said

My position is that of Saint John Paul II. The Church breathes with two lungs. And the eastern lung can be Orthodox or Catholic. The status quo must be maintained. There is a whole culture and a pastoral life that must be preserved. But uniatism is no longer the way today. In fact, I’d say it’s not licit today. Today, however, the situation must be respected and the Greek Catholic bishops helped to work with the faithful.

So basically he is saying it really doesnt matter if you are Catholic or Orthodox?

Pope Francis: 'Status quo must be maintained' for Eastern Catholics and Orthodox - LifeSite

 

[Bushum]

So basically he is saying it really doesnt matter if you are Catholic or Orthodox?

Why would it? God wills all religions

 

[twf]

Since at least the 1983 code, promulgated by St John Paul II, properly disposed Orthodox Christians have been permitted to receive communion in the Catholic Church… thus it follows that the Catholic Church does not impute the sin of schism on individual Orthodox Christians.

 

[twf]

That’s not a fair analogy. The Orthodox have valid sacraments.

 

[Bushum]

I know they do. It was a joke, that’s why I put a smiley face guy.

 

[Genesis315]

All men are called to visible unity in the Catholic Church, especially baptized persons. No one has the authority to deny be indifferent to the Church’s duty to work toward this end, whether it is by reconciling individuals or groups (“uniatism”), or even whole communions (ecumenism). No one, not even the Pope, has the right to impede unity coming about by either means, since, as the Vatican II decree on ecumenism acknowledges, “both proceed from the marvelous ways of God.” (Unitatis redintegratio 4). On the contrary, the Pope should be the first servant of unity.

I hope Pope Francis is not trying to put rigid limits on how the Holy Spirit works to increase unity, by denying the means He used in the past as potential means He might use again in the present or in the future.

 

[Prodigal1984]

I hope Pope Francis is not trying to put rigid limits on how the Holy Spirit works to increase unity, by denying the means He used in the past as potential means He might use again in the present or in the future.

That’s exactly what worries me.
I am fine with the Orthodox having valid Apostolic Succession and Sacraments but if someone who was Orthodox considering becoming Catholic read this I assume they might just say what difference does it make?

 

[dochawk]

So basically he is saying it really doesnt matter if you are Catholic or Orthodox?

Only if you completely ignore the context, and that there is nothing new in it.

+JPII also strongly directed us not to attempt to “evangelize” the Orthodox (and I’m not certain that he was the first, either).

Also take a look at what the CCC says about Orthodox and potential establishment of communion.

There’s plenty of fault to go around in the schism, and trying to poach faithful bak and forth will not help.

An “anything but them admitting being wrong” approach will not lead to unity . .

We have very clear directives from at least the last three popes on this. And go back two more, and +JohnXXIII’s aim with the second Vatican council was laying the grounds for unity, but it kind of got distracted with other issues . . . he had very strong relations with the EO . . .

So with regard. to your. base question, it’s more a matter that the faithful aren’t responsible for the results of a millennium of recto-dranial inversion from feuding prelates, and its time to take the path by which we are all one again . . .

In fact, it is widely reported that the request for Communion from an Orthodox Church (memory slips, I think it was Georgia or Estonia) was declined by the Vatican for the time being because of the rift it would cause while things are this close.

hawk

 

[Dovekin]

“Uniatism” as in the movement of groups from communion with the Orthodox to communion with Catholics, is problematic. There is not just the union with Catholics, there is also a rupture from the Orthodox, from true particular Churches. There are times when that is appropriate, but Francis thinks now is not that time. Ecumenism proceeds by deepening the bonds we share, not by creating new ruptures.

This can be true for individuals as well, but the situation is different in many ways. Individual conversions are more individual, more tailored to particular circumstances,

 

[dochawk]

Uniatism, while well intentioned, was quite unsuccessful.

While it resulted in some churches entering communion (Melkite, Ukrainian, Ruthenian), the aftermaths created schisms in each of those churches (albeit that the Ruthenian seems limited to the US, while the Ukrainian took centuries and the Soviet script police. For that matter, the Melkites had had off and on communion with Rome over the centuries).

The EC were meant as a “bridge”, but it simply didn’t work.

hawk

 

[Neithan]

The Orthodox recognize the primacy of Rome anyway, don’t they? So why are they in violation of the doctrine as defined?

Pope Francis and recent popes (canonized Saints among them) have chosen not to assert their authority to coerce Orthodox to rupture their autocephaly. This canonically provides that they are not in violation of subjection. [This is my interpretation: I am just a layman with an opinion.]

Contrast this with recent papal provisions to bring the Anglicans into full communion — much different, revealing the difference in status relative to Unam sanctam.

This is a complicated issue.

 

[poche]

That is also from Vatican II.

 

[poche]

Having the eastern rites within the Catholic Church demonstrates a recognition of the legitimacy of the tradition of the Orthodox counterparts.
Also the Orthodox see themselves as a different religion distinct from the Catholic Church.
One wonders what the answer would be to the Anglicans requesting corporate entry into the Catholic Church.

 

[Neithan]

If I may:

A definitive declaration is perpetually binding. For a successor pope to “loose” it would be contradicting the Office of the Keys. Loosing is powerful for lifting excommunications, providing dispensations † and absolution.

I don’t know if the teaching on torture has changed, but this is about defined dogma.

The language of Unam Sanctam is consistent with dogmatic declarations: “we declare, we proclaim, we define.” The Pope’s intent seems clear: perpetually binding.

† the current situation could be interpreted as a dispensation.

 

[Esodo]

The Pope isn’t dogmatically binding each and every time he speaks. Concerning torture, that is a lot more nuanced than many think when they say it “changed”. Here is a great article on it. The Church and Torture | Catholic Answers

 

[Neithan]

If it is absolutely necessary for their salvation that Orthodox be subject to the Roman Pontiff, then why would it be a mortal sin for Catholics to help the Orthodox see that they should convert and be subject to the Roman Pontiff ?

Because they do not need to “convert” — I put that word in quotations because the Orthodox belong to the ancient, Apostolic church with valid sacraments, just as we do. Again I’m just a layman with an opinion; but I think there is theological room to consider that the “Great Schism” was more like a great separation. The Orthodox are subject to the Roman Pontiff and always were; they just interpret his legal authority differently. Currently the popes in our times have not demanded that the Eastern Patriarchs submit to their supreme jurisdiction; perhaps this is a dispensation. If the Pope orders us not to proselytize on pain of sin, then that is our duty as Catholics — especially Roman Catholics — to obey the Office of the Keys as a binding precedent.

 

[GordonP]

One wonders what the answer would be to the Anglicans requesting corporate entry into the Catholic Church.

When the Traditional Anglican Communion was thinking about joining the RCC, they did not want to join the Anglican Ordinariate, but wanted to be treated as a sui juris church, so they could enter with their hierarchy intact.

The RCC said no way, the sticking point being that TAC wanted to retain married bishops.

Since then, the leadership of the TAC has changed and they are no longer interested in joining.

 

[Vico]

…
So basically he is saying it really doesnt matter if you are Catholic or Orthodox?
…

From 1990 until 2000, the main subject discussed by the International Join Commission for Theological Dialogue, was “uniatism”. H.H. Pope Francis repeats the strong recommendation from 1993 of the The International Joint Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, which can be found in the document:

JOINT INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE THEOLOGICAL DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE ORTHODOX CHURCH: SEVENTH PLENARY SESSION​

It is not a question of seeking the conversion of persons from one Church to the other. This latter type of missionary activity, which has been called “uniatism”, cannot be accepted either as a method to follow or as a model for the unity which is being sought by our Churches.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...s/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930624_lebanon_en.html

Also see remarks from plenary sessions of pontifical councils, shown below.

PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY PLENARY 2001​

“the demand of the Orthodox churches to discuss and solve first the problem of ‘uniatism’ before continuing with the agreed agenda of the dialogue has led to a dead end.”

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...chrstuni_doc_20011117_kasper-prolusio_en.html

And Plenary 2003:

Relations with the Russian Orthodox Church, which had been positive overall until the political upheaval of 1989/90, have assumed a very delicate character (beyond the latest crisis in relations with the Orthodox Church of Georgia). Accusations of uniatism (with regard to the Greek Catholic Church in Western Ukraine) and proselytism have been made since 1989–1990, worsening in 2002 with the introduction of ecclesiastical jurisdictions in the Russian Federation and, more recently, in Kazakhstan the establishment of two new dioceses in Eastern Ukraine. These difficulties emerge against a background of theological issues concerning the understanding of the Church (autocephaly, canonical territory, understanding of the term Sister Church ), as well as issues relating to the affirmation of a religious and cultural identity, and the identification with the Russian culture as a counterpoise to so–called Western liberalism, with religious liberty taken to be an expression of such liberalism.

Nonetheless, dialogue has never been completely interrupted; …

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...hrstuni_doc_20031111_prolusio-plenary_en.html

 

[Prodigal1984]

Where is that written down (that it is ex cathedra) or is it just the personal opinion of an anonymous person on the internet?

When a Pope says we declare and define, that is pretty clear it is a dogmatic statement. In fact only a handful actually use this language. Popes are very careful not to make something binding for perpetuity, because I assume he knows how permanent that is.

 

[AlNg]

. The Orthodox are subject to the Roman Pontiff

They are? Do you say they agree to be subject to the Roman Pontiff? How do you explain that some Orthodox say that the Pope must repent and return to the Orthodox church? They allow divorce and remarriage with the approval of the church. They allow artificial birth control under certain circumstances. They refuse to accept Josaphat Kuntsevich as a saint. Orthodox deny papal infallibility and universal papal jurisdiction
The letter from Orthodox bishops Seraphim and Andrew to Pope Francis, urging him to repent and to return to the Orthodox Church does not sound like they are subjecting themselves to the authority of the Roman Pontiff.

https://media.8ch.net/pdfs/src/1431529898621-1.pdf