What is Eastern Catholicism?

[TP2]

TP2 and John,

     I was thinking about this in the shower (where all inspiration is born) and I thought perhaps there is adequate middleground here between Peter holding the keys alone, and the Eastern claim that the Church as a whole holds the keys.

I will just put it simply, and maybe you two can extrapolate.

Does any of this make sense? Help me, I think you know what I am saying.

Well I am glad to hear you were having a good thinking moment. I get what you are saying and I don’t doubt that this is one of many areas the Catholic Orthodox Dialogues are going into. But we cannnot attempt to “reinvent” the Papacy as it was Taught through and exercised in The Bishop of Rome the first Millenia either. Again, The Eastern Patriarchs speak much on a higher plane of authority given by Christ to Peter through this link here:
fisheaters.com/easternfathers.html

And so as you can see, The Pope is a father figure of The Church just as God is a Father figure in Heaven even though He is pure Spirit. The word “Father” always carries with it a certain understanding of Power and Authority. I.E. I don’t don’t about what your dad was like but if I disobeyed him directly a few times, I would be disciplined no question about it…no one else in the family had say in that matter between him and me. Period Exclamatioon Point. Could my mom punish me too? Of course… Just as local bishops and patriarchs can issue decrees and disciplinary actions over their local flocks.

The distinction of Peter’s role is uniquely different from all the other Apostles. Not that The Pope is Better, smarter or wiser… Just the way the lord chose it to happen. Look, if you were the Apostle back then and Jesus told you to do something, would you argue with Him? I wouldn’t. I’d do it. Jesus gave His Power and his special Authority First to St. Peter. Just look and read what the Fathers of both the East and West have to say… Some of our friends here do not want to go against the grain of their words because they want to prov oke arguments… I don’t care. Jesus said it, I believe it. The church Teaches it. Period Exclamation Point. What else is there? Should jesus have left it to us to discuss any options? He did not. He appointed and we are to follow zHim in the Leadership roles He left behind. Would I do it differently? Maybe. Does it matter? No… He chose to do it this way. Not my way or your way or whosevers way. Peter is The Rock. No argument from anyone. I speak to orthodox clergy. Believe me. It pains me not to celebrate the Eucharist with them. They would make me their Priest yesterday. And even promise me a church. lol… I’m not kidding you. But the whole reality lies in What did the Church Teach about the papacy? Clearly The Fathers have spoken and there are many that don’t accept it. See this link of who…:
catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0904739.htm

These are some of the same people here on this forum. They protest their own bishops and patriarchs to this day. Nothing new.

And to one of your points. The POPE DOES NOT INVENT Teachings. I have shown here that The Pope Rightly Can Declare a CURRENT Teaching to be a Dogma of The faith.
If Jesus gave Peter The Power to Bind and Loose, tell me something. What does that mean to you? It means that peter declares Faith as True and that this Faith is bound not only on earth but in Heaven too. Soooo… Can Heaven Bind something that is erroneous? I think not. The fact that Jesus gave allthe Apostles the same Power AFTER The reserrection shows Only that this power is a shared (Collegial) Power of binding and Loosing meaning that any bishop can Teach AND Preach Infallibly the Truths that the Church is Teaching Infallibly through the Councils and Peter in His Successors. In other words it’s not backwards from the Apostles to Peter… It’s through Peter WITH The Apostles… Otherwise you have anarchy. You know how many Orthodox are confused about their Faith? Yet they are all in cmmunion with Pat Bartholomew. So how or who decides tangled issues and broken beliefs? Who has the Teeth in Othodoxy? No one. That’s who. That is why some in Orthodoxy want to argue and protest these meetings and dialogues.

We have to try to come back to the first Millenium. And it was always understood probably more so through Leo The Great and Gregory both of whom were Popes that Peter is The Rock and is at The Helm of the Ship called The church. Did you ever see a crew of a cruise liner without a captain? No… It would cease being a vessel pretty soon. Chaos would ensue and there would be no recognition of anyone.

Just read the fathers of The East. Read… Word for Word they call Peter “who lives in his Successors in Old Rome” or First Rome.

if we try to reinvent what that was today, then we are not doing anyone one any favors. That is why many Orthodox are coming to Rome to see the Pope these days… A few have even bowed before him… Something unheard of… We pray and watch and pray some more…

You ever see this before? I never could imagine in a thousand years, no pun.

youtube.com/watch?v=IdlYrSeHneI&playnext_from=TL&videos=nLjPVeeIEns

Just Read…

fisheaters.com/easternfathers.html

 

[Gregory_I]

So you really are a priest TP2?

I don’t like to think I have been rude to a priest, but it’s hard to give that kind of benefit of the doubt.

I am not trying to reinvent the papacy, I am only saying what the last 2 popes have said: Universal Jurisdiction is not the only way to look at it, and there is room to develop this teaching of the Pope in other directions from different angles. The Melkites haven’t been condemned for Being basically “Orthodox in Communion with Rome” in their own words.

One legitimate question I have though, is why does the Roman Catholic Church dogmatize issues that weren’t dogmas in the apostolic church? I mean, How can we proclaim Mary’s assumption a DOGMA (I believe it) Which is a teaching binding upon Catholics to hold with divine and Catholic faith upon pain of Mortal Sin, when Mary was living herself in the Apostolic age? It was not necessary when she lived, So Why should it be made a dogma after her dormition? Same with the Imm. Con.
Not all truths need be dogmas, I mean, Is the Catholic church going to dogmatize that Mary was a woman?

The Byzantine understanding of Mariology is more that it’s sort of like the church’s inner secret. You learn about it after you enter the church, and it belongs specially to the Christian. It’s not some huge Dogmatized article of Faith Put out for strict observance. It’s a reflection on the Church’s own inner life expressing the life of the Theotokos.

SOme of it I don’t understand the need to do…

 

[mathewjoseph]

St John Chrysostom, the great Patriarch of Constantinople (4th century) in his letter to Flavian, the Patriarch of Antioch, addresses Flavian as Peter.
St. Chrysostom says "Ignatius of Antioch a “successor of Peter, on whom, after Peter, the government of the church devolved”

And in another place Chrysostom says this:
“Since I have named Peter, I am reminded of another Peter [Flavian, bishop of Antioch], our common father and teacher, who has inherited as well the virtues as the chair of Peter. Yea, for this is the privilege of this city of ours [Antioch], to have first (ἐν ἀρχῇ) had the coryphaeus of the apostles for its teacher. For it was proper that the city, where the Christian name originated, should receive the first of the apostles for its pastor.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Dear Friends,

I really think there is no need for the harshness detected in some of the posts here.

Ultimately, we may hurl Patristic quotations at each other ad infinitum. What defines the Petrine Ministry/Papacy is not what this or that Father stated, but what the Church herself affirms. For example, the fact that St Catherine had a vision of the Mother of God who, according to her, told her she was not immaculately conceived had no bearing on how the Church understands the sinlessness of the Mother of Jesus.

The office of the Petrine Minister, namely the Pope of Rome, is unchanging. How he exercises his roles in and for the Church can adapt to different circumstances. Again, I don’t know of any Orthodox or serious Protestant theologian for that matter who denies the historic role of authoritative arbiter, among others, embodied in the Pope of Rome.

With respect to the Particular Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church and her Patriarch (whom Ukrainian Catholics affirm is their Patriarch), the UGCC only wishes to exercise its right to govern itself. So it appoints its own bishops and then informs Rome that it has done so. Rome has the primacy of jurisdiction which it can and does share with the local and Particular Churches in communion with it. If Rome can bring itself to fully respect the heritage of the Eastern Catholic churches, as promised in the various acts of reunion and implied in Vatican II, that would go a long way to encourage the Orthodox and the Anglicans/Lutherans who wish to come into communion with Rome. Or so say I.

Alex

 

[skyvia]

the beliefs and practices of any of the eastern Catholic Churches based in Constantinople or Antioch or Alexandria or Moscow or Jerusalem.

 

[Vico]

the beliefs and practices of any of the eastern Catholic Churches based in Constantinople or Antioch or Alexandria or Moscow or Jerusalem.

Plus the Italo-Greek-Albanian Catholic Church (with about 64,000 faithful) which was originally in the Roman Patriarchate, then moved to Constantinople Patriarchate (8th to 11th century), then back to Roman. This traditional territory is south of Rome, Mezzogiorno.