M
mardukm
Guest
Dear brother Nine_Two,
Blessings,
Marduk
Can you please explain this? I would think the idea of more than one ritual Church in a territory would deprive phyletism of its relevance.That situation ends up giving rise to a certain phyletism.
I believe the canonical prescription is that there should be one bishop in one city, not necessarily one particular Church. If a region consists of more than one city, why can’t bishops share the same territorial region, but simply have their seats in different cities? Of course, the notion of “city” is obviously subjective, so that should be considered as well…There should, ideally, be only one church in a given territory.
Could your perspective be borne of the fact that you as an EO are simply not used to the idea? It’s certainly worked fine for Catholics in Canada and Syria, for instance, or for Oriental Orthodox in Israel and Egypt.Different rites are fine, but if you have different churches, even if they are in Communion, people don’t feel comfortable dealing with different churches and you basically have the same situation we have now.
Blessings,
Marduk