Roundtable discussion on what being "in communion" means

[UnionOfHearts]

This is just a Latin mentality that has crept into the Eastern (Byzantine) Catholic Churches. As far as the “Apostolic Courts” are concerned, if you are referring to the various Roman Congregations, they do not have more authority over particular (at least Patriarchal) Churches than our Patriarch and Synod of Bishops. It is the duty of our Patriarchs and Synods to interpret Canon Law for us, of course with the help of Canon Lawyers. The current Eastern Code has been mourned over by numerous Eastern Catholic hierarchs, theologians, canon lawyers, etc. Revisions have been suggested as well, but whether or not those happen is a different question. But we’re really getting into much deeper questions here than whether or not the Eastern Code is binding on Eastern Catholics (who didn’t actually write the Code). The question that we’re really getting into is whether the Church of Rome (no not just the Pope as “First among Equals” and “Servant of the Servants of God”) has authority over the Eastern Churches, or if the Eastern Churches are truly free to govern themselves according to their own particular traditions while at the same time maintaining communion with Rome. These questions are much debated by scholars far more knowledgeable than myself. I do not pretend to know the answers.

There are a couple of point here:

1. Is the Eastern Code binding on Eastern Catholics? Yes, so says The Pope and the Holy See
2. By the Apostolic courts I mean the courts which exercise the final right of appeal of the Pope, as such they are above ALL particular churches as the Pope retains his right as the final court of appeal in all cases
   3)Does the Pope have authority over the Eastern Churches? Yes, it isnt I who say so nor scholars but the constant tradition of the church, any number of church councils, popes, all codes of canon law and any number of catechisms. Indeed the matter is De Fide and has been inflalibly defined and settled a number of times most notably at the Council’s of Florence and Vatican I.

That said, so as not to de-rail the thread I won’t go into anymore depth.

Thank you! My little family could certainly use all the prayers we can get. I was just mourning the fact that I couldn’t go to the DL today or yesterday (or on most other feast days for that matter). I’m not too worried about the obligation; God knows my heart is there at the Divine Liturgy even though my body can’t be there right now.

So could we all, so could we all. And I’m sure he could, of course there is always the possibility of a ‘Spiritual act of communion’, though I confess I don’t know whether thats an Eastern Tradition or not.

Note from Moderator:

This discussion on what it means to be in communion was sufficiently off-topic to create a new thread from it. Please see here for the original discussion on holy days of obligation in Eastern Catholicism.

May God Bless You Abundantly,
Catherine Grant
Eastern Catholicism Moderator

 

[ciero]

There are a couple of point here:

1. Is the Eastern Code binding on Eastern Catholics? Yes, so says The Pope and the Holy See
2. By the Apostolic courts I mean the courts which exercise the final right of appeal of the Pope, as such they are above ALL particular churches as the Pope retains his right as the final court of appeal in all cases
   3)Does the Pope have authority over the Eastern Churches? Yes, it isnt I who say so nor scholars but the constant tradition of the church, any number of church councils, popes, all codes of canon law and any number of catechisms. Indeed the matter is De Fide and has been inflalibly defined and settled a number of times most notably at the Council’s of Florence and Vatican I.

That said, so as not to de-rail the thread I won’t go into anymore depth.

So could we all, so could we all. And I’m sure he could, of course there is always the possibility of a ‘Spiritual act of communion’, though I confess I don’t know whether thats an Eastern Tradition or not.

IMHO the code should be flushed!

 

[UnionOfHearts]

IMHO the code should be flushed!

Then I urge you to consider what the words ‘in communion with rome’ mean, whats the point of claiming communion if you reject anything Rome does that you don’t like? And this not on the basis of it being contrary to Divine Law, Natural Law or Divine revelation.

 

[Cristiano]

Then I urge you to consider what the words ‘in communion with rome’ mean, whats the point of claiming communion if you reject anything Rome does that you don’t like? And this not on the basis of it being contrary to Divine Law, Natural Law or Divine revelation.

The one that you use is quite a broken logic. I would stray away from this kind of statements that are a generalization of a specific comment. I think that Latin Catholics need to start looking at the Eastern Churches from the point of view of the Eastern Churches. A lot of things that are patrimony of the Latin Church came to be because of particular western issues that never affected the eastern world, thus we should keep what is western to the west and we should not automatically dump it on the eastern world that did not experience those historical events. Just look at the precepts of the Church, why do we need them? They were already part of our Tradition. Why is the precept about marriage gone?

 

[ciero]

Then I urge you to consider what the words ‘in communion with rome’ mean, whats the point of claiming communion if you reject anything Rome does that you don’t like? And this not on the basis of it being contrary to Divine Law, Natural Law or Divine revelation.

Get suspended under one name and come back under another !

 

[ciero]

Then I urge you to consider what the words ‘in communion with rome’ mean, whats the point of claiming communion if you reject anything Rome does that you don’t like? And this not on the basis of it being contrary to Divine Law, Natural Law or Divine revelation.

The code of canon law for the Eastern Churches is just another Latinization…written by Latin, imposing Latin Law on us Easterners. Like I have said many times on CAF, I believe in the role of the Papacy…and in being in communion with the See of Rome…as long as it is possible to live as a Byzantine in communion with the See of Rome I will do so.

Rome needs to stop speaking out of both sides of her mouth…telling us to rid ourselves of Latinizations and imposing more Latinizations on us at the same time.

And FYI…being in communion with Rome is NOT the same as being under the thumb of Rome!

I subscribe to the Zoghby Initiative.

 

[John_oxios]

There are a couple of point here:

1. Is the Eastern Code binding on Eastern Catholics? Yes, so says The Pope and the Holy See
2. By the Apostolic courts I mean the courts which exercise the final right of appeal of the Pope, as such they are above ALL particular churches as the Pope retains his right as the final court of appeal in all cases
   3)Does the Pope have authority over the Eastern Churches? Yes, it isnt I who say so nor scholars but the constant tradition of the church, any number of church councils, popes, all codes of canon law and any number of catechisms. Indeed the matter is De Fide and has been inflalibly defined and settled a number of times most notably at the Council’s of Florence and Vatican I. :

Actually church’s in communion with Rome have their leaders, their Traditions, but turn to the holy Father the Pope as spiritual leader:

Churches in union with Rome
Armenian Catholic Church. Byzantine Catholic Church, Chaldean Catholic Church (East Syrian), Coptic Catholic Church, Ethiopian Catholic Church, Maronite Church, Melkite Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Romanian Catholic Church, Russian Catholic Church, Ruthenian Catholic Church, Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, Ukrania Catholic Church, West Syrian Catholic Church

God bless,
john

 

[UnionOfHearts]

The one that you use is quite a broken logic. I would stray away from this kind of statements that are a generalization of a specific comment. I think that Latin Catholics need to start looking at the Eastern Churches from the point of view of the Eastern Churches. A lot of things that are patrimony of the Latin Church came to be because of particular western issues that never affected the eastern world, thus we should keep what is western to the west and we should not automatically dump it on the eastern world that did not experience those historical events. Just look at the precepts of the Church, why do we need them? They were already part of our Tradition. Why is the precept about marriage gone?

I’m well aware of this but this doesn’t apply in this case I’m afraid, especially as the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches itself states that these laws apply to the Eastern Churches.

 

[UnionOfHearts]

Get suspended under one name and come back under another !

 

[UnionOfHearts]

The code of canon law for the Eastern Churches is just another Latinization…written by Latin, imposing Latin Law on us Easterners. Like I have said many times on CAF, I believe in the role of the Papacy…and in being in communion with the See of Rome…as long as it is possible to live as a Byzantine in communion with the See of Rome I will do so.

Rome needs to stop speaking out of both sides of her mouth…telling us to rid ourselves of Latinizations and imposing more Latinizations on us at the same time.

And FYI…being in communion with Rome is NOT the same as being under the thumb of Rome!

I subscribe to the Zoghby Initiative.

Being in communion with Rome means obeying Rome, theres no two ways about it. It’s one thing to disobey a Pope or claim cannon law is wrong if someone can make a cogent argument that it contradicts the churches infallible doctrines, saying ‘its not our tradition we don’t have to follow it’ isnt a cogent argument.

As for imposing latinization, maybe thats because Rome believes that the East’s genuine tradition is to obey and follow Rome and indeed Rome makes a very cogent argument in that regard. Forcing people to use confessionals or imposing celibacy on Eastern Rite priests is one thing, asking people to follow the Church’s infallible dogma is quite another.

 

[ciero]

UnionOfHearts;8248807***:

Being in communion with Rome means obeying Rome, *

theres no two ways about it. It’s one thing to disobey a Pope or claim cannon law is wrong if someone can make a cogent argument that it contradicts the churches infallible doctrines, saying ‘its not our tradition we don’t have to follow it’ isnt a cogent argument.

As for imposing latinization, maybe thats because Rome believes that the East’s genuine tradition is to obey and follow Rome and indeed Rome makes a very cogent argument in that regard. Forcing people to use confessionals or imposing celibacy on Eastern Rite priests is one thing, asking people to follow the Church’s infallible dogma is quite another.

Wrong again…

 

[malphono]

Well, my [post=8248470]prediction[/post] seems to have come true. OK, so I’m not the oracle of Delphi, but all the same, I knew it was inevitable. It’s been the same with mose threads lately. A new, and from my POV, unwelcome phenomenon.

 

[Cristiano]

Well, my [post=8248470]prediction[/post] seems to have come true. OK, so I’m not the oracle of Delphi, but all the same, I knew it was inevitable. It’s been the same with mose threads lately. A new, and from my POV, unwelcome phenomenon.

If you were to give yourself a dollar for every time that you were right you would still have the same amount of money.

 

[UnionOfHearts]

Wrong again…why not take your Latin mentality somewhere else sir!?

Nope, its not Latin, its Catholic

 

[malphono]

Nope, its not Latin, its Catholic

If I say anything it would just be redundant. Oy …

 

[UnionOfHearts]

Well, my [post=8248470]prediction[/post] seems to have come true. OK, so I’m not the oracle of Delphi, but all the same, I knew it was inevitable. It’s been the same with mose threads lately. A new, and from my POV, unwelcome phenomenon.

I hardly challenging peoples points of view is either particularly new or unwelcome.

 

[malphono]

I hardly challenging peoples points of view is either particularly new or unwelcome.

In this thread, and in the circumstances, that’s a matter of opinion, I suppose.

 

[Diakonia]

Actually church’s in communion with Rome have their leaders, their Traditions, but turn to the holy Father the Pope as spiritual leader:

Churches in union with Rome
Armenian Catholic Church. Byzantine Catholic Church, Chaldean Catholic Church (East Syrian), Coptic Catholic Church, Ethiopian Catholic Church, Maronite Church, Melkite Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Romanian Catholic Church, Russian Catholic Church, Ruthenian Catholic Church, Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, Ukrania Catholic Church, West Syrian Catholic Church

God bless,
john

Not sure what the point of the list is, but it only names about 2/3 of the Churches in the Catholic Communion ( 60.869565217391304347826086956522% of them, to be precise)

 

[theistgal]

Yes the Rudder is available in English…not sure where though…I bought mine over 20 years ago for the tune of $150. It is a VERY interesting read.

Actually, ciero, based on what I’ve read of your posts so far, both in this thread and others, I think Union has a good point. You describe yourself as “orthodox in communion with Rome”, yet you reject much of what Rome teaches.

Now, I am not saying you’re right or wrong to do that. However, it does make one wonder why you feel it’s necessary to be “orthodox in communion with Rome” (a description which the Orthodox themselves find rather amusing, from what I’ve read ).

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

And the Eastern Congregation in Rome is way past its “best before” date for a number of reasons.
Cheers,

Alex

I don’t want to get any more involved in this conversation as I believe Alex has said it all (thank you), but this comment…