What is the relationship of Eastern Catholics to the Pope?

[Marc_Anthony]

I’ve seen threads about this before, and it always seems to me like a straight answer is always avoided. May I get a straight answer, please? What is the Pope’s relationship to the Eastern Catholic Churches, and how is it different from his relationship with the Orthodox Churches?

[And I’m referring to the Pope of the Latin Rite, an office currently held by His Holiness Benedict XVI. Not the Coptic Pope. ]

 

[ConstantineTG]

Eastern Catholic bishops (and therefore the Churches) are under the authority and rule of the Pope. That is what it is. The Eastern Orthodox are not.

 

[Ignatius]

I’ve seen threads about this before, and it always seems to me like a straight answer is always avoided. May I get a straight answer, please? What is the Pope’s relationship to the Eastern Catholic Churches, and how is it different from his relationship with the Orthodox Churches?

[And I’m referring to the Pope of the Latin Rite, an office currently held by His Holiness Benedict XVI. Not the Coptic Pope. ]

Eastern Catholic Patriarchs and Prelates and their Churches are in full communion with the Holy See of St. Peter and recognize the primacy of both honour and authority, whereas the Orthodox Patriarchs recognize the primacy of honour only.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Thank you both for the clear answers!

Okay, the first question has been answered very nicely by both of you

Now here’s another question, while I’m learning: What do the Eastern Catholics believe falls under the definition of the Pope’s “authority”?

I don’t want a debate about it…I understand us latins and the Orthodox have different ideas (at least, the latins probably have different ideas). I would just like to know what the Eastern Catholics believe is implied by the Pope having “authority” over you.

Thank you very much for your kind answers to my first question.

 

[Hesychios]

I’ve seen threads about this before, and it always seems to me like a straight answer is always avoided. May I get a straight answer, please? What is the Pope’s relationship to the Eastern Catholic Churches, and how is it different from his relationship with the Orthodox Churches?

These are some of the canons which illustrate the relationship of the bishop of Rome to his Eastern Christian followers, and illustrate the power he routinely exercises …
Canon 45

1. The Roman Pontiff, by virtue of his office (munus), not only has power over the entire Church but also possesses a primacy of ordinary power over all the eparchies and groupings of them by which the proper, ordinary and immediate power which bishops possess in the eparchy entrusted to their care is both strengthened and safeguarded. 2. The Roman Pontiff, in fulfilling the office (munus) of the supreme pastor of the Church is always united in communion with the other bishops and with the entire Church; however, he has the right, according to the needs of the Church, to determine the manner, either personal or collegial, of exercising this function. 3.** There is neither appeal nor recourse against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff.**

Canon 46
… 2. The participation of patriarchs and other hierarchs who preside over Churches sui iuris in the synod of bishops is regulated by special norms established by the Roman Pontiff.

Canon 47
When the Roman see is vacant or entirely impeded nothing is to be innovated in the governance of the entire Church; however, special laws enacted for those circumstances are to be observed.

Canon 51

1. It is for the Roman Pontiff alone to convoke an ecumenical council, to preside over it personally or through others, to transfer, suspend or dissolve it, and to confirm its decrees.
2. **It is for the same Roman Pontiff **to determine matters to be treated in a council and to establish the order to be followed in the same council; to the questions proposed by the Roman Pontiff the fathers of a council can add other questions, to be approved by the same Roman Pontiff.

Canon 57

1. The erection, restoration, modification and suppression of patriarchal Churches is reserved to the supreme authority of the Church.

Canon 72
… 2. If an election is not successful within fifteen days from the opening of the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church, the matter devolves to the Roman Pontiff.

Canon 76
… 2. The new patriarch must as soon as possible request ecclesiastical communion from the Roman Pontiff by means of a letter signed in his own hand.

Canon 77
… 2. The patriarch is not to convoke a synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church nor ordain bishops before he receives ecclesiastical communion from the Roman Pontiff.

Canon 78
… **2. The power of the patriarch is exercised validly only inside the territorial boundaries of the patriarchal Church unless the nature of the matter or the common or particular law approved by the Roman Pontiff establishes otherwise.
**
The following are the canons which governed the relationship between the bishop of Rome and all the Eastern churches for the first 1,000 years before the Great Schism …

 

[Marc_Anthony]

The following are the canons which governed the relationship between the bishop of Rome and all the Eastern churches for the first 1,000 years before the Great Schism …

BEFORE, the Great Schism, huh? That’s very interesting…I didn’t realize that all of these powers granted to Roman Pontiff dated so far back.

Hmmm…things to think about.

 

[Cavaradossi]

BEFORE, the Great Schism, huh? That’s very interesting…I didn’t realize that all of these powers granted to Roman Pontiff dated so far back.

Hmmm…things to think about.

Indeed, I wonder why the list is so empty.

To be fair, however, there are some canons from the first millennium which Hesychios missed, like several canons from several early fifth century councils in Carthage, which declared excommunicate any African clergy who sent appeals “across the see” (to Rome), regarding judgments made against them by African bishops.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Indeed, I wonder why the list is so empty.

To be fair, however, there are some canons from the first millennium which Hesychios missed, like several canons from several early fifth century councils in Carthage, which declared excommunicate any African clergy who sent appeals “across the see” (to Rome), regarding judgments made against them by African bishops.

No, you’re right. It has more canons on it than I thought, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t more canons today.

I’m not trying to find evidence to undermine the Orthodox here. I’m learning.Not that you accused me of this, just to clarify

 

[Cavaradossi]

No, you’re right. It has more canons on it than I thought, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t more canons today.

I’m not trying to find evidence to undermine the Orthodox here. I’m learning.Not that you accused me of this, just to clarify

I think you misunderstood Hesychios’s post. The canons he posted are all modern ones. His list of first millennium canons is empty. He was being facetious, I think.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

I think you misunderstood Hesychios’s post. The canons he posted are all modern ones. His list of first millennium canons is empty. He was being facetious, I think.

Well then…in my defense I’m here for a reason

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Hesychios forgot the canons of Sardica

 

[Hesychios]

Hesychios forgot the canons of Sardica

I considered both Carthage and Sardica, but both being local councils each in conflict with the another do not seem to have determined a standard binding practice for the church.

It is interesting that the Council of Sardica suggested the bishop of the Roman church as a referee, and I respect that. The text of the Sardica canon informs us that if a bishop has been deposed by his own synod and appeals to the bishop of the Roman church for help getting his See back, the bishop of the Roman church may (if he sees fit) look at the matter and if found an argument worthy of further consideration he should refer the matter to a neighboring synod for retrial. The second trials are held by the neighboring synods.

I think possibly that this came up because of ongoing strife over Arianism, and the churchmen were anticipating a lot of depositions in the immediate future. It was probably expected to be messy.

 

[Cavaradossi]

I considered both Carthage and Sardica, but both being local councils each in conflict with the another do not seem to have determined a standard binding practice for the church.

It is interesting that the Council of Sardica suggested the bishop of the Roman church as a referee, and I respect that. The text of the Sardica canon informs us that if a bishop has been deposed by his own synod and appeals to the bishop of the Roman church for help getting his See back, the bishop of the Roman church may (if he sees fit) look at the matter and if found an argument worthy of further consideration he should refer the matter to a neighboring synod for retrial. The second trials are held by the neighboring synods.

I think possibly that this came up because of ongoing strife over Arianism, and the churchmen were anticipating a lot of depositions in the immediate future. It was probably expected to be messy.

What’s strange is that the council of Trullo approved the Councils of Sardica and Carthage as being canonical. Perhaps they rubberstamped them because of the prestige these local councils held, but that has always been something that has puzzled me.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Michael,

I considered both Carthage and Sardica, but both being local councils each in conflict with the another do not seem to have determined a standard binding practice for the church.

When I had not yet joined the Catholic communion, I was confused by this too - but it was a confusion that I know was simply – indoctrinated (for lack of a better word)-- into me, and not something I really investigated. After I joined the Catholic communion, I investigated the matter thoroughly and discovered there was no conflict.

The fact is, Carthage only forbade PRIESTS from going to Rome, and fully recognized Sardica. Sardica, on the other hand, dealt with the appellate authority of Rome in relation to BISHOPS. Two different animals.

The idea that there is a conflict between Carthage and Sardica I soon discovered to be false, polemical baggage that I am glad I left behind when I joined the Catholic communion.

It is interesting that the Council of Sardica suggested the bishop of the Roman church as a referee, and I respect that. The text of the Sardica canon informs us that if a bishop has been deposed by his own synod and appeals to the bishop of the Roman church for help getting his See back, the bishop of the Roman church may (if he sees fit) look at the matter and if found an argument worthy of further consideration he should refer the matter to a neighboring synod for retrial. The second trials are held by the neighboring synods.

I think “referee” is a good word. A referee applies the rules and his word is law during a game. Similarly, it was the bishop of Rome’s prerogative to do the same (as an appellate authority, not a unilateral authority).

I think possibly that this came up because of ongoing strife over Arianism, and the churchmen were anticipating a lot of depositions in the immediate future. It was probably expected to be messy.

Sardica was originally intended to be an Ecumenical Council, but was not so only because most of the Eastern bishops were heretics and did not accept the Council. I find it amusing that when discussing this matter with EO in the past, they always make a big deal of the fact that “the Eastern bishops did not accept it.” They completely miss the point that the Eastern bishops were mostly heretics.

I believe there has been debate whether or not Sardica’s provisions were only meant to be a temporary fix (during the Arian crisis), or meant to be an ecclesiastical standard. Trullo’s affirmation of its canons would seem to indicate the latter.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Peter_J]

and how is it different from his relationship with the Orthodox Churches?

What’s his relationship with the Orthodox Churches?

 

[Hesychios]

What’s his relationship with the Orthodox Churches?

I think it is one of mutual respect.