Sui Juris

  • Thread starter Thread starter In_Hoc_Signo312
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

In_Hoc_Signo312

Guest
I have heard the term “sui juris” used in reference to regions in parts of the world in which there are very few Catholics in a particular country. Is it roughly equivalent to a Diocese? Is there still a bishop there? What is different from a Diocese?
 
I have heard the term “sui juris” used in reference to regions in parts of the world in which there are very few Catholics in a particular country. Is it roughly equivalent to a Diocese? Is there still a bishop there? What is different from a Diocese?
Eastern Canon Law (CCEO)

TITLE 2

Churches Sui Iuris and Rites

Canon 27

A group of Christian faithful united by a hierarchy according to the norm of law which the supreme authority of the Church expressly or tacitly recognizes as sui iuris is called in this Code a Church sui iuris.

cnewa.org/default.aspx?ID=54&pagetypeID=9&sitecode=hq&pageno=2
 
I have heard the term “sui juris” used in reference to regions in parts of the world in which there are very few Catholics in a particular country. Is it roughly equivalent to a Diocese? Is there still a bishop there? What is different from a Diocese?
More than a diocese, a whole, self-governing church with its own Canon of law. Maronites have a Patriarch, and regional bishops. We are Orthodox who are in communion with the Patriarch of Rome, Pope Francis.
 
I have heard the term “sui juris” used in reference to regions in parts of the world in which there are very few Catholics in a particular country. Is it roughly equivalent to a Diocese? Is there still a bishop there? What is different from a Diocese?
If you had not posted in Eastern Catholicism, then I would have mentioned the Latin sui iurus situations, such as a mission sui iuris, in areas of Latin Church jurisdiction. A **mission sui iuris **can be directly subject to the Holy See instead to a Metropolitan Archbishop.
 
More than a diocese, a whole, self-governing church with its own Canon of law. Maronites have a Patriarch, and regional bishops. We are Orthodox who are in communion with the Patriarch of Rome, Pope Francis.
Maronites were not and have never been Eastern or Oriental Orthodox.
 
More than a diocese, a whole, self-governing church with its own Canon of law. Maronites have a Patriarch, and regional bishops. We are Orthodox who are in communion with the Patriarch of Rome, Pope Francis.
Maronites are not “Orthodox in communion with Rome”. In all my life, I’ve never heard that phrase applied to the Maronite Church.
In order for the Maronite Church to be “Orthodox in communion with Rome”, there would have to be a corresponding Maronite counterpart in Orthodoxy which is not in communion with Rome. There isn’t one.

I don’t know where you got this idea. Do you have some sort of documentation?
The Maronite Heritage link doesn’t even mention the word Orthodox.

If Malphono, or MorEphrem, happen by and they say otherwise, I will stand corrected.
 
Exactly they were never Orthodox. I know their history but read your link anyway. They were always Catholics and never broke communion with Rome (although Rome forgot about them until the crusaders found them again and reconfirmed communion).

They were never part of the Easter Orthodox (as they always held communion with Rome and were not involved in the split between the Byzantines and the Latins). They even participated in the post schism Ecumenical councils like when Patriarch Jeremias II Al-Amshitti (1199–1230) became the first Maronite Patriarch to visit Rome when he attended the Fourth Council of the Lateran in 1215.

Nor we’re they part of the Oriental Orthodox communion as the maornites accepted Chalcedon.
 
Maronites are not “Orthodox in communion with Rome”. In all my life, I’ve never heard that phrase applied to the Maronite Church.
In order for the Maronite Church to be “Orthodox in communion with Rome”, there would have to be a corresponding Maronite counterpart in Orthodoxy which is not in communion with Rome. There isn’t one.

I don’t know where you got this idea. Do you have some sort of documentation?
The Maronite Heritage link doesn’t even mention the word Orthodox.

If Malphono, or MorEphrem, happen by and they say otherwise, I will stand corrected.
Maronite history is a bit controversial. All evidence points to a common root with the Syriac Orthodox and Syriac Catholics, but an isolated mountain community that had monothelite leanings. They came into contact with the Crusaders and joined into communion with them nearly immediately. Today, many within the Maronite Church tend to downplay that they are the Maronite SYRIAC Church, and emphasis the union with the Latins and their Catholicism rather than get messy with some historical … whats the word… matters (I think is what Mr. Comey said).
 
Exactly they were never Orthodox. I know their history but read your link anyway. They were always Catholics and never broke communion with Rome (although Rome forgot about them until the crusaders found them again and reconfirmed communion).

They were never part of the Easter Orthodox (as they always held communion with Rome and were not involved in the split between the Byzantines and the Latins). They even participated in the post schism Ecumenical councils like when Patriarch Jeremias II Al-Amshitti (1199–1230) became the first Maronite Patriarch to visit Rome when he attended the Fourth Council of the Lateran in 1215.

Nor we’re they part of the Oriental Orthodox communion as the maornites accepted Chalcedon.
The Maronites accepted the Chalcedonian (451) formula, so were Melchites (Melk is Syriac for king ), the dogma of two wills of Christ was declared later at the Third Council of Constantinople in 681.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top