What was that about the rights and dignity of the Eastern Catholic Churches?
I’m sure the eastern Catholic priests who didn’t want to fly headlong into torture and death at the hands of Islamic extremists, and the people they have served for many years in the U.S., feel that Pope Francis has actually defended their rights and dignity.
I understand Orthodox discomfort with the notion that the pope may exercise supreme authority at his discretion, but what we have here is not that.
What we have here is literally no different from things that happened time and time again in the many centuries we were in full communion: the participants in a dispute between clergy appeal to Rome. Rome is literally asked to render judgment. Rome does as asked.
Certain aspects of the relations between Rome and the eastern Catholic churches need to be improved, but matters such as this one are not among them. This procedure is more classic first millennium than most facts on the ground about contemporary Catholic and Orthodox ecclesial structures.
Depriving eastern Catholic clergy and lay Christians of their ancient right of appeal:
that would be a violation of their ecclesial rights and dignity.
If the Pope of Rome had barged in I would agree. That was not the case. As I understand the situation, the Chaldean bishop in the US appealed to Rome on behalf of these priests. Would you deprive the Chaldean bishop a privilege the bishops of the ancient Church had prior to the Great Schism? Rome barging in would be an abuse of papal primacy, but the canons and practice of the ancient undivided Church always supported the right to APPEAL to Rome (or any higher authority).
I don’t think the Pope is considered the Patriarch’s religious superior. I think it is a matter of process. Disciplinary actions in the Church generally include a right to appeal. In this case, the appeal is made to the Vatican.
Precisely. Well said, both of you. The right of different ecclesial parties - even laity in certain situations, canonically speaking - to appeal to Rome is quite ancient and ought to be uncontroversial.
Actually the right of appeal belonged to the Ecumenical Patriarch, but that’s really beside the point. First the issue was heard by the synod. Did the Chaldean synod hear the case?
That’s a good question. I don’t know, but from what I’ve read, I’m pretty sure the Chaldean patriarch wasn’t budging. Either way, clergy have the right to appeal to Rome. That is what happened. Pope Francis did
not stick his nose in unsolicited. He was
asked by the Chaldean Catholic clergy to make a ruling on this matter.
Well yes, an appeal to Rome is not a modern novelty, but this matter concerns an INTERNAL disciplinary issue. Should the appeal in this case not have been made to the Holy Synod?
You’d agree, wouldn’t you, that proper ecclesiastical procedures aren’t dictated directly by God, right? They’re justly the purview of canon law, and canonically those Chaldean Catholic clergy chose of their own free will to appeal to Rome. They have the right to do so. Disputing that fact isn’t a defense of their autonomy but an infringing of it.
Again, the Chaldean Catholic clergy of the western United States explicitly sought intervention from Pope Francis. They asked him to become involved. No papal imposition in this scenario has occurred.
Not necessarily. I was thinking of a case within the Latin Church. If a priest disagreed with a disciplinary action of his Bishop, he could appeal to one of the Congregations within the Vatican, such as the Congregation for the Clergy or the CDW. If the Congregation issued a decision, that doesn’t mean that anyone in the Congregation is that Bishop’s religious superior. It only means that they have the authority to hear and act on appeals.
Excellent point. It’s not really accurate to say Pope Francis is Patriarch Sako’s “religious superior.” Rather, it’s that Pope Francis has the right to hear appeals directed to the supreme authority of the Church.
The Chaldean Catholic Church is an independent Catholic Church that is in communion with Rome because it is an independent Catholic Church. The Church is not one giant diocese with one bishop. At least it shouldn’t be.
Agreed, but the right of Rome to hear appeals doesn’t make the bishop of Rome some kind of super bishop. It just means that the faithful have the right to appeal to him. That’s all.
