Resignation of an Archbishop

[Hesychios]

I picked this up off of another site, but I am interested in the opinion of Eastern catholics who post here.

Metropolitan Isadore of the Melkite Greek Catholic church has resigned. Pope Benedict accepted his resignation on the 6th of September.

My interest in this has to do with the fact that the bishop of Rome has accepted the resignation, not the Patriarch of Antioch nor the Melkite Synod of bishops.

Why do Eastern Catholic bishops submit their resignations to the bishop of Rome? Well, I understand why the Ruthenians would, but why the Melkites?

 

[twf]

I agree that this does seem very odd - especially when one considers the fact that the Melkite Synod elects its own bishops. (With the exception, I assume, of those outside of the ‘homeland’).

 

[Aramis]

His Archdiocese was Homs, in Syria.

It seems odd. Especially since the linked reference says exceedingly little…

 

[Vico]

I picked this up off of another site, but I am interested in the opinion of Eastern catholics who post here.

Metropolitan Isadore of the Melkite Greek Catholic church has resigned. Pope Benedict accepted his resignation on the 6th of September.

My interest in this has to do with the fact that the bishop of Rome has accepted the resignation, not the Patriarch of Antioch nor the Melkite Synod of bishops.

Why do Eastern Catholic bishops submit their resignations to the bishop of Rome? Well, I understand why the Ruthenians would, but why the Melkites?

The Melkite Patriarch has territorial limits, outside which, resignation is given to the Roman Pontiff. Mons. Isidore Battikha, Archbishop of Homs, Syria, resigned, but Syria is in an area of ad normam iuris of the Congregation for the Eastern Churches, the eastern regions, so I suspect that all the Patriarchs and Major Archbishops must decide certain issues together (they are in the CEC). So it seems that he followed the rule for “outside the territorial boundaries of a patriarchal Church”.

Orientalium Dignitas, Nov 30, 1894 Pope Leo XIII: “We have granted to the Greek Melkite Patriarch jurisdiction also over those faithful of the same rite who reside within the Ottoman Empire.”

CCEO Canon 210

1. An eparchial bishop who has completed his seventy-fifth year of age or who, due to ill health or to another serious reason, has become less able to fulfill his office, is requested to present his resignation from office.
2. This resignation from office by the eparchial bishop is to be submitted to the patriarch if it is the case of an eparchial bishop exercising authority inside the territorial boundaries of a patriarchal Church; in other cases, it is submitted to the Roman Pontiff; further, if the bishop belongs to a patriarchal Church, the patriarch is to be notified as soon as possible.
3. To accept this resignation the patriarch needs the consent of the permanent synod, unless a request for resignation was made previously by the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church.

 

[Hesychios]

Hi Vico,

The Melkite Patriarch has territorial limits, outside which, resignation is given to the Roman Pontiff. Mons. Isidore Battikha, Archbishop of Homs, Syria, resigned, but Syria is in an area of ad normam iuris of the Congregation for the Eastern Churches, the eastern regions, so I suspect that all the Patriarchs and Major Archbishops must decide certain issues together (they are in the CEC). So it seems that he followed the rule for “outside the territorial boundaries of a patriarchal Church”.

I realize that you have qualified your comment with the word ‘suspect’, so I understand we are all just trying to reason this out as best we can, but if anything I would think any spot in Syria was considered home territory of the Melkite Patriarchal Synod. I was under the impression that there were more Melkites in Syria than in Lebanon, Turkey, Palestine or Jordan (not to mention the Patriarch is residing in Damascus). All of these states were formerly under Ottoman control, with Syria and southern Turkey being the Melkite heartland. I think that the way the Vatican looks at it, the home territories of some churches must by necessity overlap, but that should not compromise the rights of the Synods acting within their own church affairs.

If anything (by the looks of it), if Syria is not within the home territory of that church, it must have lost it’s home territory (unlikely, I am sure we would have heard about it before now ). I just feel that this cannot be the explanation although it is a noble attempt.

Are there any Melkites here who know anything about this?

 

[Vico]

Hi Vico, I realize that you have qualified your comment with the word ‘suspect’, so I understand we are all just trying to reason this out as best we can, but if anything I would think any spot in Syria was considered home territory of the Melkite Patriarchal Synod. I was under the impression that there were more Melkites in Syria than in Lebanon, Turkey, Palestine or Jordan (not to mention the Patriarch is residing in Damascus). All of these states were formerly under Ottoman control, with Syria and southern Turkey being the Melkite heartland. I think that the way the Vatican looks at it, the home territories of some churches must by necessity overlap, but that should not compromise the rights of the Synods acting within their own church affairs.

If anything (by the looks of it), if Syria is not within the home territory of that church, it must have lost it’s home territory (unlikely, I am sure we would have heard about it before now ). I just feel that this cannot be the explanation although it is a noble attempt.

Are there any Melkites here who know anything about this?

There is much history on the Melite websites, but I could not find any authoratative definitive of the territory. I also looked in my reference book on Eastern Churches.

Ottoman Empire includes Homs.
lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/ottoman1683_shepherd.jpg

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Tyler,

I agree that this does seem very odd

As pointed out by brother Vico, the action is in line with Canon 210 of the Eatern Code. I’ve always said the Eastern Code could use some changes. This is one Canon subsection that we can do without.

- especially when one considers the fact that the Melkite Synod elects its own bishops. (With the exception, I assume, of those outside of the ‘homeland’).

There is no exception. There is no distinction between the election of a bishop within the patriarchal territory from that of a bishop outside of it. The distinction is on the basis of whether the bishop is newly ordained or not. The election of a bishop to an eparchy has no papal involvement if the incumbent is already a bishop. However, if the incumbent still requires episcopal ordination, papal ratification is required, and the Pope can theoretically reject the incumbent. However, the Pope chooses the alternative candidate from a group already pre-selected by the Synod. The Pope can choose an alternative candidate that was not selected by the Synod, but the Synod has the prerogative to reject that candidate. At that point, the election process is repeated.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Michael,

Hi Vico, I realize that you have qualified your comment with the word ‘suspect’, so I understand we are all just trying to reason this out as best we can, but if anything I would think any spot in Syria was considered home territory of the Melkite Patriarchal Synod. I was under the impression that there were more Melkites in Syria than in Lebanon, Turkey, Palestine or Jordan (not to mention the Patriarch is residing in Damascus). All of these states were formerly under Ottoman control, with Syria and southern Turkey being the Melkite heartland. I think that the way the Vatican looks at it, the home territories of some churches must by necessity overlap, but that should not compromise the rights of the Synods acting within their own church affairs.

If anything (by the looks of it), if Syria is not within the home territory of that church, it must have lost it’s home territory (unlikely, I am sure we would have heard about it before now ). I just feel that this cannot be the explanation although it is a noble attempt.

Are there any Melkites here who know anything about this?

Granted, as an Oriental, I more readily accept the idea that Syria is not the natural territory of the Melkites (i.e., as an Oriental, I would grant either the Syriac Catholic or the Maronite Patriarch the honor of regarding the Syrian lands as their traditional territory). But I also see it from another point of view. From my understanding, there is an hierarchy of honor connected with the prerogative of jurisdiction in any given territory. Precedence in that hierarchy of honor is determined by the chronological establishment of a particular Church in the area. If the Melkite jurisdiction over the Syrian territories was established within the Catholic communion only in 1894 with Orientalium Dignitas, then precedence must go to either the Syriac Catholic or Maronite Patriarch in a claim to have Syria as his natural territorial jurisdiction. So it would seem proper, for the sake of Church order, for a Melkite hierarch of Syria to consider himself “outside of the traditional territory.”

Regardless of all that, I’m of the opinion that the canon subsection that provides for submitting resignations to the Supreme Pontiff if the bishop is outside the traditional patriarchal territory should be removed from the Eastern Code.

Blessings,
Marduk