Theoretical Question - Married American Priest

[Ghosty]

However you may want to look at it it is stil ROMAN whether it is antiochian, urkranian or lunararian.

And whoever wants to undermine that fact that the Holy Catholic Church is Roman above all other names is going down a dangerous path.

Obedience that is not enthusiasctic put rather half-hearted ends up in treachery.

The only Roman aspect of the Melkite Church is the Eastern Roman, or Constinopolitan.

Incicently, I’m nottalking about disobeying the Pope; I’m pointing out that it’s utterly inappropriate to refer to the non-Latin Churches as “Roman”.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Pro_Domina]

Utterly inappropiate?

My goodness!

The more sui juris we are the happier we’ll be.
Because my bishops are my bishops and your bishops are your bishops…The more we are not together the happier we’ll be.

That is what it sounds to me. The Church is has a Roman imprint whether it be in Rome, England or China.

I love the Eastern Rites. They were less subject to liturgicism of the both kinds. The East is so much attracted to marvelous things, more than the West in many aspects.
God made the East more contemplative.
God loves variety as I said before.
But divisions due to pride are not part of God’s intentions.
Differences are good, divisions aren’t.

 

[dixieagle]

However you may want to look at it it is stil ROMAN whether it is antiochian, urkranian or lunararian.

And whoever wants to undermine that fact that the Holy Catholic Church is Roman above all other names is going down a dangerous path.

Obedience that is not enthusiasctic put rather half-hearted ends up in treachery.

“Celibacy is not required by the priesthood itself, as is evident in the practices of the early Church, and in the tradition of the Eastern Churches” (No. 16 of the Decree Concerning the Ministry and Life of the Priest - a document of Vatican II.)

The other 22 sui iuris church are in communion with Rome, but NOT “Roman Catholic” and to insist that they are is either arrogant or ignorant of history and canon law.

 

[Aramis]

Utterly inappropiate?

My goodness!

The more sui juris we are the happier we’ll be.
Because my bishops are my bishops and your bishops are your bishops…The more we are not together the happier we’ll be.

That is what it sounds to me. The Church is has a Roman imprint whether it be in Rome, England or China.

Vatican II made it clear, as well, in the post conciliar documents, that the term Roman Catholic is JUST the Roman Rite, and NOT the Eastern Catholics.

So does Canon Law.

 

[Pro_Domina]

Say what you will.
Vatican II simply stopped saying Roman Catholic as much as they used too, opting for the Catholic Church.

Once again. Diplomacy.

Too many Eastern Catholics with thoughts of crossing the Tiber.

But I am more worried about Latin rite ones crossing the Styx.

 

[Badaliyyah]

Say what you will.
Vatican II simply stopped saying Roman Catholic as much as they used too, opting for the Catholic Church.

Once again. Diplomacy.

Too many Eastern Catholics with thoughts of crossing the Tiber.

But I am more worried about Latin rite ones crossing the Styx.

hmmm…I got news for ya. We are already well east of the Tiber.

 

[Pro_Domina]

I hope that your lighthouse is still in Rome though.

You see as much as there is a strong yet beautiful diference among the ways of worship and mentalities between East and West, the Pope, the Roman Pontiff unites us in Christ.

That is one of the greatest reasons why all Churches are Roman, as well as anything else it may be.

Trust me I love the Eastern Rites. I used to go to the Melkite rite all the time. St. Charbel to me is a really good example of seriousness in absolutely everything. I love how an easterner would spend hours in contemplation of something a westerner wouldn’t even think twice about.
But I am adamantly against any minuscle sign of underestimating the profound union we have with Rome.
As the Divine Office in the Latin Rite says for the Solemnity of St. Peter and St. Paul, Rome is glorious not for its political achievements but for the Saints that lived and died there.

Viva Roma Eterna!

 

[bpbasilphx]

That is one of the greatest reasons why all Churches are Roman, as well as anything else it may be.

Don’t you get it yet? All Churches–even those in communion with Rome–are NOT Roman.

 

[Pro_Domina]

A contemporary (last century) Catholic writer once said:
“Everything that is in the Church that is holy, of authority and of supernatural virtue, everything, absolutely everything without exception, nor conditionoly nor restrictively, is subordinate to, conditioned to, dependent on the union with the Chair of St. Peter. The institutions most sacred, the most venerated works, the most holy traditions, the most famous people, in short, everything that can genuinly and sovereignly express Catholicism and decorate the Church of God, all of this becomes null, accursed, sterile , worthy of eternal flames and the Wrath of God if it deviates from the Roman Pontiff.”

 

[Badaliyyah]

I hope that your lighthouse is still in Rome though.

You see as much as there is a strong yet beautiful diference among the ways of worship and mentalities between East and West, the Pope, the Roman Pontiff unites us in Christ.

That is one of the greatest reasons why all Churches are Roman, as well as anything else it may be.

Trust me I love the Eastern Rites. I used to go to the Melkite rite all the time. St. Charbel to me is a really good example of seriousness in absolutely everything. I love how an easterner would spend hours in contemplation of something a westerner wouldn’t even think twice about.
But I am adamantly against any minuscle sign of underestimating the profound union we have with Rome.
As the Divine Office in the Latin Rite says for the Solemnity of St. Peter and St. Paul, Rome is glorious not for its political achievements but for the Saints that lived and died there.

Viva Roma Eterna!

Trust me I love Rome. Of course Latin saints and theology can at times be sources of inspiration and reflection, just as as the Byzantine or Syrian tradition (etc.) can be a source of inspiration and reflection for Latin life and theology and so on. But if you are an easterner looking to Rome for leadership, something has gone horribly wrong. Not because there isn’t an appropriate time to look to Rome for guidance, but because that time is when something has gone horribly wrong: a trans-ecclesial crisis. Rome is a long way from home. We have our own bishops and, ultimately, our own Apostolic seats for a reason.

The unity of the Body of Christ is found in Christ himself, in the Eucharist of which we all partake. Unity is not a possession of Rome.

A contemporary (last century) Catholic writer once said:
“Everything that is in the Church that is holy, of authority and of supernatural virtue, everything, absolutely everything without exception, nor conditionoly nor restrictively, is subordinate to, conditioned to, dependent on the union with the Chair of St. Peter. The institutions most sacred, the most venerated works, the most holy traditions, the most famous people, in short, everything that can genuinly and sovereignly express Catholicism and decorate the Church of God, all of this becomes null, accursed, sterile , worthy of eternal flames and the Wrath of God if it deviates from the Roman Pontiff.”

And that quote is indicative of a Rome that had forgotten, through centuries of neglect, that it was one among fellows, and not the autocrat of solitary realm. Fortunately, today, Rome is recalling its place amongst the Apostolic communion.

salaam.

 

[Pro_Domina]

Listen.

That quote happens to be one of the most perfect expressions of what being a Catholic means.

If there are three things that identify us it the Eucharist, The Virgin Mary and the Papacy.

Your statements totally undermine that strong union with the Pope.

That I am against and will severly condemn it. Even if the Pope was Judas I would be on my knees while I argued with him.
No one can express themselves with such a light manner of the Papacy.

Recognizing his place?
What is that?
He is the supreme authority on this Earth!
If anything his place needs to be MORE accerted!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Say what you will.
Vatican II simply stopped saying Roman Catholic as much as they used too, opting for the Catholic Church.

Once again. Diplomacy.

Too many Eastern Catholics with thoughts of crossing the Tiber.

But I am more worried about Latin rite ones crossing the Styx.

Eastern Catholics with thoughts of crossing the Tiber?

I think a bias is showing.

Just to state it again, Eastern Catholics are Catholics. No need to “cross the Tiber” as they are already in communion with the Pope.

I think you may need to go read some of those documents to learn that it is much more than “Diplomacy”.

There is no way one can make the claim that Eastern Catholics are just Roman Catholics. The term Roman Catholic started out as a slander from the protestants.

 

[Hesychios]

…Even if the Pope was Judas I would be on my knees while I argued with him.
No one can express themselves with such a light manner of the Papacy.

Recognizing his place?
What is that?
He is the supreme authority on this Earth!

Interesting thread!

How does one understand this in consideration of the authority of an Ecumenical Council?

 

[Ungcsertez]

Utterly inappropiate?

My goodness!

The more sui juris we are the happier we’ll be.
Because my bishops are my bishops and your bishops are your bishops…The more we are not together the happier we’ll be.

That is what it sounds to me. The Church is has a Roman imprint whether it be in Rome, England or China.

I love the Eastern Rites. They were less subject to liturgicism of the both kinds. The East is so much attracted to marvelous things, more than the West in many aspects.
God made the East more contemplative.
God loves variety as I said before.
But divisions due to pride are not part of God’s intentions.
Differences are good, divisions aren’t.

…you meant to say “I love the Eastern PARTICULAR CHURCHES”, right?

Ungcsertezs

 

[Pro_Domina]

Interesting thread!

How does one understand this in consideration of the authority of an Ecumenical Council?

Contrary to popular belief, the ecumenical councils have force due to the backing of the Pope. If every single member of the council wants to change the color of St. Peter’s or order that the colors of ordinary time should be orange the Pope can say no and that is it. He is the maximum authority.

Now what is true about the principle of collegiality is that the Pope should not, but can order around a bishop in his diocese. Say the Pope thinks the cathedral shoul be named Light of the Ignorants instead of Help of All Christians, the bishop obeys but the Pope commits a sin because he is not respecting that principle. Get the idea?

 

[Pro_Domina]

Eastern Catholics with thoughts of crossing the Tiber?

I think a bias is showing.

Just to state it again, Eastern Catholics are Catholics. No need to “cross the Tiber” as they are already in communion with the Pope.

I think you may need to go read some of those documents to learn that it is much more than “Diplomacy”.

There is no way one can make the claim that Eastern Catholics are just Roman Catholics. The term Roman Catholic started out as a slander from the protestants.

My dear brother,

Not only are the Eastern churches a risk, but even many Latin diocesses are on the brink of a massive schism.

Just to mention a couple of countries who have formally protested against the Pope you could say USA, Canada, Austrailia, and many diocesses in Europe.

In the US more than once did they find funds being siphoned into a parallel church like in China.

Times are coming in why our colors will truly show.

Being a minimalist in relation to the Pope is not a good thing to be. Remember, only one Eastern rite (yes I say rite because not all rites are their particular churches and yet there is a difference among them) remained faithful always to the church. And I have been to melkite and other rites and see that tendency floating around there. This is not true of all but it runs alot.

And it isn’t bias, because I could say worst about priests in the US the way they speak about the Pope.

“Yeah the Pope, we listen and whatever, but who runs things here is me and the bishop and I are friends, so…”

So what?

 

[Ungcsertez]

My dear brother,

Not only are the Eastern churches a risk, but even many Latin diocesses are on the brink of a massive schism.

Just to mention a couple of countries who have formally protested against the Pope you could say USA, Canada, Austrailia, and many diocesses in Europe.

In the US more than once did they find funds being siphoned into a parallel church like in China.

Times are coming in why our colors will truly show.

Being a minimalist in relation to the Pope is not a good thing to be. Remember, only one Eastern rite (yes I say rite because not all rites are their particular churches and yet there is a difference among them) remained faithful always to the church. And I have been to melkite and other rites and see that tendency floating around there. This is not true of all but it runs alot.

And it isn’t bias, because I could say worst about priests in the US the way they speak about the Pope.

“Yeah the Pope, we listen and whatever, but who runs things here is me and the bishop and I are friends, so…”

So what?

Rites and/or rites pertain to liturgical expression. All Eastern and Oriental Churches in union w/Rome should be addressed as PARTICULAR CHURCHES, as it is a sign of respect for these ancient church Traditions (w/ a capital “T”).

Ung

 

[bpbasilphx]

Not only are the Eastern churches a risk, but even many Latin diocesses are on the brink of a massive schism.

**Are you implying that any of the Eastern Catholic churches would go into schism?

Fie!

They have suffered much for their loyalty to the Catholic Communion. What you seem to be saying is insulting, disrespectful, and uncharitable to them.**

Just to mention a couple of countries who have formally protested against the Pope you could say USA, Canada, Austrailia, and many diocesses in Europe.

I’m not too sure what you mean by “formally protested against the Pope” (I wouldn’t dignify the tastelesss pelting of WYD pilgrims with condoms as a protest), but what kind of father would forbid his children to respectfully and lovingly ask him to reconsider something?

 

[Pro_Domina]

Respectfuly?
That is the last adverb I’d used to describe the letters and statements out of some of them.

Anyhow, you are being fanatical about your approach to the Eastern particular churches(I am just pleasing you but that particular makes it sound so legalistic rather than a beautiful institution.) and their existence. You seem to have a problem accepting that there is quite a substancial difference in numbers, influence and authority between the Latin Church and all others.
Now, like I said before it is not a competition.
You can’t compare sanctity between two saints, but you can compare their vocations, and in a comparison, unless they are the same exact thing (God is the only being in which the three Persons are the same) there is one superior to the other.

Now if you want to start going down that path of comparison and foolish fanatical pride then you would be crushed should someone choose to put you in your place.

 

[bpbasilphx]

You seem to have a problem accepting that there is quite a substancial difference in numbers, influence and authority between the Latin Church and all others.
Now, like I said before it is not a competition.
You can’t compare sanctity between two saints, but you can compare their vocations, and in a comparison, unless they are the same exact thing (God is the only being in which the three Persons are the same) there is one superior to the other.

**Are you trying to claim that the Latin Church is spiritually superior?

Again, this is PRECISELY an attitude that inhibits reconciliation.

Numbers don’t really matter.

And the Latin Church has no more authority than any of the other particular churches.**