The HUUUGE difference between CATHOLIC and ROMAN CATHOLIC

  • Thread starter Thread starter Corpus_Cristi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Lance:
This site: credo.stormloader.com/ritesofc.htm list 26 churches, 3 of them Latin rite, but we seem to be picking nits. Lets all pray for the day when all of the Churches of the world are united with Rome.
Lance,

As my brothers, Amado and Michael, have noted, the Ambrosian and Mozarabic “Rites” are integral parts of the Latin Church.

The site you reference also lists a Czech Church among those of the Byzantine Rite. The Czech Exarchate is a Byzantine Ruthenian jurisdiction, not a Church sui iuris.

Taking those 3 out of the equation, brings the list to 23, 1 Latin and 22 Eastern or Oriental.

Many years,

Neil
 
40.png
Amadeus:
However, our Eastern Catholic brethren are a little bit sensitive to inexact enumeration of their respective sui juris Churches. There are only 22 sui juris Eastern Catholic Churches of varying sizes: 6 Patriarchal Churches, 2 Major Archbishoprics, 1 Metropolitanate, and the rest are at most Eparchial in size.
Amado, my brother,

I have to correct you on the break-out by presiding hierarchical status. There are 4 Metropolitan Churches sui iuris, the Byzantine Ruthenian Church, the Byzantine Romanian Church, the Ethiopian & Eritrean Church, and the Syro-Malankarese Church. The best “group” descriptor for the remainder is probably Episcopal Churches sui iuris, as the presiding hierarch of each is of the order of bishop, although variously styled.

Many years,

Neil
 
40.png
Contarini:
with the exception of the Maronites the other churches are fragments of their mother churches which have broken off and sought communion with Rome.
Edwin,

Actually, the Byzantine Italo-Greico-Albanian Catholic Church sui iuris has no Orthodox counterpart, as it has never been separated from Rome.
40.png
Contarini:
These churches do not enjoy full autonomy (for instance, a Latin Rite bishop has to be present at all Byzantine Rite consecrations, if I’m not mistaken). They are not treated as full equals. Ask one of them! The fact is, whether you like it or not, that the Roman Rite does have a dominant and normative status in the Catholic Church, and any claim otherwise is sheer propaganda.
The degree of autonomy exercised by Eastern and Oriental Catholic Churches sui iuris indeed varies from one “type” of Church to another, with Patriarchal Churches sui iuris enjoying essentially full autonomy within the historical territories of the patriarchate - somewhat less in the diaspora. However, you are absolutely mistaken in your assertion that a Latin Rite bishop has to be present at all Byzantine Rite consecrations. As a practical matter, in the diaspora, one or more Latin Rite bishops are frequently present, as guests, at episcopal ordinations of Byzantine (and other Eastern/Oriental) hierarchs (as are our bishops at Latin Rite consecrations). Notably, Orthodox bishops are frequently present and sometimes hierarchs of other Churches (Anglican, Lutheran, etc), as well. In the historic territories of the patriarchates, in particular, the presence of a Latin Rite hierarch is rare, as there are few, if any, available to be invited as guests.

Are the Eastern Churches sui iuris full equals? We are. A week ago, I functioned as the unofficial master of protocol for the enthronement of a Melkite Eparch. The procession of hierarchs included approximately 10 Eastern/Oriental hierarchs from across the US, Canada, and South America, and roughly the same number of Latin hierarchs, all of whom were from the dioceses in the neighboring 6 state area. The order of precedence for the hierarchs in procession was established using the same criterion for each, regardless of sui iuris Church, - the bishop’s date of episcopal ordination. After them, was to have processed a Metropolitan of the Greek Orthodox Church (he had to cancel at the last minute and sent a prelate to represent him), followed by a Latin Metropolitan Archbishop and a Ukrainian Metropolitan Archeparch. After them, the Latin Metropolitan Archbishop of the locale in which the enthronement took place (accorded a precedence ad honorem because he is the successor in office to someone who was particularly instrumental in the erection of our first canonical jurisdiction in the US) and then, the Metropolitan Archeparch of the Byzantine Ruthenians, accorded precedence by virtue of being the presiding hierarch of a sui iuris Church. The Apostolic Nuncio to the US was next, followed by the Patriarch of Antioch & All the East, of Alexandria & Jerusalem of the Melkite Greek-Catholics, the presiding hierarch of our Church and the “ranking” hierarch in attendance.

Admittedly, there are some limitations on the autonomy of our Churches in the diaspora; we look forward to the day, hopefully soon, that such will disappear. But, to label our sui iuris status as propaganda is incorrect.

Many years,

Neil
 
The 6 Eastern/Oriental Catholic Patriarchal Churches and the incumbents of the office are:

Armenian Catholic Church:
His Beatitude Nerses Bedros XIX Tarmouni, Catholicos & Patriarch of Cilicia of the Armenias for All the Catholic Armenians & Archeparch of Cilicia of the Armenians

Byzantine Melkite Catholic Church:
His Beatitude Gregory III (Loutfi) Laham, Patriarch of Antioch and All The East, of Alexandria, and of Jerusalem, of the Greek-Melkites & Archeparch of Antioch of the Melkites

Chaldean Catholic Church:
His Holiness Mar Emmanuel III Delli, Catholicos and Patriarch of Babylon and Ur of the Chaldees for the Catholic Chaldeans & Archeparch of Baghdad of the Chaldeans

Coptic Catholic Church:
His Holiness Stephanos II (Andraos) Cardinal Ghattas, C.M., Patriarch of Alexandria of the Catholic Copts & Archeparch of Alexandria of the Copts

Maronite Catholic Church:
His Beatitude Mar Nasrallah Boutros Cardinal Sfeir, Patriarch of Antioch and All The East of the Maronites & Archeparch of Antioch of the Maronites

Syriac Catholic Church:
His Beatitude Mar Ignace Pierre VIII (Gregoire) Abdel-Ahad, Patriarch of Antioch and All The East of the Syrian Catholics & Archeparch of Antioch of the Syrians

(continued)
 
Next after the Patriarchal Churches are the Major Archepiscopal Churches sui iuris. There are 2 of these:

Syro-Malabarese Catholic Church, led by His Eminence Mar Varkey Cardinal Vithayathil, C.Ss.R, Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabarese Catholics & Archbishop of Ernakulam-Angamali of the Syro-Malabarese; and,

Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, led by His Eminence Lubomyr Cardinal Husar, Major Archbishop of the Byzantine Ukrainian Catholics & Archbishop of Lviv of the Byzantine Ukrainians

There are 4 Metropolitan Arch-Episcopal or Arch-Eparchial Catholic Churches sui iuis. They are:

Ethiopian (Ge’ez) (& Eritrean) Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency Berhane-Yesus Demerew Souraphiel, C.M., Metropolitan Archbishop of Addis Ababa of the Ethiopian Catholics

Byzantine Romanian Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency Lucian Muresan, Metropolitan Archbishop of the Arch-Eparchy of Alba Iulia and Fagares of the Romanian Greek Catholics United with Rome

Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church, presided by His Eminence Metropolitan Archbishop Basil Myron Schott, O.F.M., Arch-Eparch of Pittsburgh for the Byzantine Ruthenian Catholics in the United States

Syro-Malankarese Catholic Church, presided by His Grace, The Most Reverend Cyril Mar Baselios Malancharuvil, O.I.C., M.A.D.D., J.C.L., Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Eparchy of Trivandrum for the Syro-Malankarese Catholics

(continued)
 
Lastly, are the Episcopal Churches sui iuris. Episcopal Churches sui iuris are those Eastern Churches "entrusted to hierarchs who preside over [the Church] as per the norms of common and particular laws”.

All such Churches are of the Byzantine-Greek or Byzantine-Slav Traditions. Their presiding hierarchs are all of the Order of Bishop, but are variously styled: Abbott vere nullius dioecesis; Apostolic Administrator; Apostolic Exarch; Apostolic Visitator ad nutum Sanctae Sedis; Bishop; Eparch; or Vicar Apostolic.

Each derives precedence from his office * not from the rank or title that he holds.

These are:

Byzantine Albanian Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency, Bishop Hil Kabashi, O.F.M., Apostolic Administrator of Albania Meridionale [Southern Albania] for Albanian Byzantine Catholics

Byzantine Bulgarian Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency, Bishop Christo Proykov, Byzantine-Slav Apostolic Exarch of Sophia for the Byzantine Bulgarian Catholics & Titular Bishop of Briula

Byzantine Croatian Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency, Monsignor Slavomir Miklovs, Vladyka [Bishop] of the Eparchy of Krizevci for the Byzantine Croatian Catholics and for All Byzantine Catholics [in the former Republics of Yugoslavia]

Byzantine Greek Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency, Bishop Anárghyros Printesis, Apostolic Exarch of Athens for the Faithful of the Eastern Rite of the Byzantine Greek Catholics

Byzantine Hungarian Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency Szilárd Keresztes, Bishop of the Diocese of Hajdúdorog of the Byzantine Hungarian Catholics

Byzantine Slovak Catholic Church, presided by His Excellency Ján Babjak, S.J., Bishop of the Eparchy of Presov of the Byzantine Slovakian Catholics

(continued)*
 
The final two Episcopal Churches sui iuris each require further explanation as to some unique aspects that apply to them.

Byzantine Italo-Grieco-Albanian Catholic Church. This Church is unique in that it has 3 separate and independent jurisdictions, which have no formal canonical relationship between or among them. None of the three presiding hierarchs has been singularly designated as the presiding hierarch of the Church. Thus, although they are counted as a single Church sui iuris, they are technically three distinct Churches. They are:

His Excellency Ercole Lupinacci, Bishop of the Eparchy of Lungro degli Italo-Albanesi [for the Italo-Albanians] in Calabria

His Excellency Sotìr Ferrara, Bishop of the Eparchy of Piana degli Albenisi [for the Italo-Albanians] in Sicily

Right Reverend Archimandrite Emiliano Fabbricatore, O.S.B.I., Abbott vere nullius dioecesis of the Exarchic Abbey and Territorial Monastery sui iuris of Santa Maria di Grottaferrata for the Byzantine Italo-Greek Catholics

Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church. This Church and its suffragn jurisdictions, situated in the Eastern Europe homelands of its faithful, has no formal canonical relationship with the Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Metropolitan Church sui iuris in the United States. As a result, it is technically a Church sui iuris unto itself, although the two should be considered as a single entity for purposes of counting Churches sui iuris. It is presided by His Excellency Milan Sasek, C.M., Apostolic Administrator of the Eparchy of Mukaèevo of the Byzantine Ruthenian Catholics.

(continued)
 
The final grouping of Eastern Churches sui iuris are those “entrusted to hierarchs (not of the Rite) who preside over (the Church) as per the norms of common and particular laws” (hierarchs locum tenens), either because the Church was never formally organized with its own hierarchy or the See is vacant. All such churches are of the Byzantine Greek or Slav Traditions.

Byzantine Belarusan Catholic Church. The hierarchical jurisdiction, the Apostolic Exarchate for the Byzantine Belarusan Catholics, is sede vacante and has been since after WWII, when the Church and Exarchate were suppressed. The Church’s rights were restored in 1989, but the See has not been reconstituted. The Most Reverend Father Archimandrite Sergius Gajek, MIC, is presently Apostolic Visitator ad nutum Sanctae Sedis for the Greek-Catholics in Belarus.

Byzantine Georgian Catholic Church. The Apostolic Exarchate of Istanbul for the Byzantine Georgian Catholics is [sede vacante]. His Excellency Bishop Louis Pelâtre, A.A., [Latin] Vicar Apostolic of Istanbul is locum tenens. The viability of the Church is in question. There is a single parish and an estimated 1,500 faithful, but at last report there are no clergy of the Church.

Byzantine Russian Catholic Church. This Church has two canonical jurisdictions with no formal canonical relationship between the two, and neither’s hierarch was ever singularly designated as presiding. Thus, they also technically constitute separate Churches sui iuris, although they represent a single entity for purposes of counting such Churches. The jurisdictions are:

The Apostolic Exarchate of Moscow for Byzantine Russian Catholics in Russia and the Apostolic Exarchate of Harbin for Russian Byzantines and All Oriental Rite Catholics in China. Both are sede vacante since the martyrdom of their incumbents under the Communists. The Church’s last hierarch, Bishop Andrei Katkov, of blessed memory, an episcopus ordinans without jurisdiction, reposed in 1996.

There are a small number of other ethnic communities of Eastern Catholics that have never been formally accorded their own sui iuris status but have distinct jurisdictions within various sui iuris Churches. These principally are Czechs, Macedonians, Poles, and Serbians.

The important distinctions between Eastern Catholic Churches sui iuris of Patriarchal status and the others relate to the authority, rights, and privileges of the presiding hierarch, which differ significantly among the various types.

Many years,

Neil
 
40.png
Contarini:
Corpus Christi,

You actually don’t need to quote the entire post–people who want to can read the original post farther up the thread. More to the point, you don’t really address my arguments–you just repeat that terms like “RCC” are “inaccurate” and disrespectful. You don’t address the fact that it’s precisely the definition of the Catholic Church that is being debated between Protestants and Catholics. From a Protestant point of view, it is inaccurate to refer to Christians in communion with Rome as “Catholics” in a context that implies that the rest of us are not. We don’t expect you to adopt our way of speaking–don’t expect us to adopt yours.

In Christ,

Edwin
ONE-You seem to be implying that you can determine one’s disposition simply from what they write.
TWO-I’m not trying to adopt anyone to my way of speaking, but rather to the correct way of speaking. When someone says something that’s incorrect, it’s not prudent to let them keep doing it when you know it’s not correct. Do I ever speak of another denomination or Church in context to where it is headed by it’s earthly leader/founder or in context to what it broke off from? No. Does anyone else in this forum? No. We have enough respect for referring to their churches in the correct way, you and others should have the same respect. That’s all I’m saying. The reason I posted the same thing I posted in my first post to this thread is because I don’t think you got what it was I was talking about. This isn’t about ME being in MY comfort zone, having people speak the way I want them to because it’s the way I speak, but because it’s the way one SHOULD speak. Check out this link at EWTN.com

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/churb3.htm
 
40.png
Exporter:
FOR WHAT IT’S WORTH. When the Pope John Paul II signs documents : it will read Catholic Church, not Roman Catholic Church.🙂
As a Catholic from the Philippines, we perfectly understand that once you claim Catholicsm, it pertains to the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome which is where the seat of the Vicar of Christ, successor of Peter is. Roman Catholic Church or Catholic Church simply means ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, APOSTOLIC Church.
 
Terminology. Terminology & Terminology! Why? Because it MEANS something!

The one word that “Amadeus” used that was telling to me was the word “practice”. That word describes methods of worship, clothing, prayers and litergies that can be changed - MAN’S “LAW”. While GOD’S Law is ever unchanged. Not one Rite can change the theology of the Real Presence! They can change those man-made “practices”.

“Corpus Christi” used the word “practice”. I agree totally with “Losav”.

Dear Lance:

There are only 23 Churches in the Catholic Communion: 1 Western: the Roman Catholic Church (Latin or Roman Rite, with “uses”), and 22 Eastern Catholic Churches of vaious sub-rites (rescensions) of the major Eastern Rites (Antiochian, Byzantine/Constantinopolitan, and Alexandrian).

Thanks for this, it agrees with what I have learned.

John Paul II signed a document within the past three years ( I forget it’s name) in which he signed it as John Paul II -Catholic, not Roman Catholic. I do not fully understand that.
 
40.png
Exporter:
John Paul II signed a document within the past three years ( I forget it’s name) in which he signed it as John Paul II -Catholic, not Roman Catholic. I do not fully understand that.
Only a personal theory, I suppose because when he signs documents relating to the whole Catholic Church, he is acting as Pope of the whole Church, (signing Catholic) or it could be a document relating only to the Latin Rite in which case he is acting as the Patriarch of his Rite. (signing Roman Catholic).

In practice however I would imagine he would sign with respect to his office as Pope of the whole Church on any document. For example if a priest in Rome wrote to him on a diocesan matter I don’t think the letter would be replied to by John Paul, Bishop of Rome!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top