OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 27, 2014, 06:39:19 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Differences in Ecclesiology  (Read 1915 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« on: December 24, 2008, 08:14:20 PM »

Let me preface this by stating that this thread is NOT directly about the papacy and I don't want to get into discussion about the papacy in this thread. So what is this thread about?

The Eastern Orthodox make the claim that their ecclesiology is how the Church has operated since day one. That Bishops all have equal authority and such and that any such privileges for a "higher up" such as a Patriarch are merely honorary (which I take to mean first in the buffet line and sit at the head table). It also seem to me, from what I have observed, that in praxis that the laity have just as much if not more authority in presenting the faith than the Bishops.

If that is the case, that the Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is the way the Church has always operated, why is it that the ecclesiology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches, which left communion with Rome and Constantinople in the 5th century, is closer to that of the Catholic Church than the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology has a definite sense of hierarchial authority that carries real prerogatives and jurisdictional oversight.

For example, in the Syriac Orthodox Church:


Church Hierarchy

The supreme head of the Syriac Orthodox Church is the Patriarch of Antioch and all the East. He also presides over the Holy Synod, the assembly of all bishops.

The local head of the church in Malankara (India) is the Catholicos of the East. The Catholicos is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Antioch and is accountable to the Holy Synod and the local Malankara Synod. He is consecrated by the Patriarch and presides over the local Holy Synod.

The local head of every archdiocese is an archbishop. He is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch and is accountable to the Holy Synod. The archbishop is ordained by the Patriarch and at least two bishops. Some archdioceses are ‘patriarchal vicarates’; the patriarchal vicar, regardless of ecclesiastical office, is accountable directly to the Patriarch.



Bishop Kaloustian (former Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople) writes in "Saints and Sacraments of the Armenian Church":

The office of Catholicos is the highest office in the Armenian Church. The Catholicos is the head of the whole Armenian Church. It is a Greek word meaning General. The full title of the head of the Armenian Church is “Supreme Patriarch Catholicos of All Armenians.


The website of the Armenian Apostolic Church states:

The Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians is the worldwide spiritual leader of the Nation, for Armenians both in Armenia and in the Dispersion.  He is Chief Shepherd and Pontiff to nearly 9 million Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Christians, dispersed throughout the world.

The supreme head of the Church is Jesus Christ.  In the hierarchy of the Armenian Apostolic Church the Catholicos, a Greek term signifying “Universal Leader of the Church”, ranks higher than Patriarchs, Archbishops and Bishops in the Armenian Church.  He is typically chosen from the College of Bishops, and once elected is regarded as the “First Among Equals."  The Catholicos is consecrated by 12 bishops.

The Catholicos represents the centralized authority of the Armenian Church.  He is the supreme judge and the head of the legislative body.  He is President of the Supreme Spiritual Council as well as the College of Bishops.  Ordination of bishops, blessing of Holy Chrism, proclamation of Feasts, invitation and dismissal of National-Ecclesiastical Assemblies, issuing decrees concerning the administration of the Armenian Church and establishing dioceses are part of his responsibilities.



In the Armenian Apostolic Church, only the Catholicos has the prerogative to bless the Holy Myron for distribution to all the local Churches under him.



According to a website for the Coptic Orthodox Church:

+ The Patriarch is the highest rank in the bishopric level and has the highest or greatest ruling of priesthood.

+ Patriarch is the leader of the Church, bishops and all metropolitans.

+ Patriarch is the successor of the Apostles and first father of the Church.

+ Patriarch is symbol of unity of Church: around when priests, deacons and bishops gather with all the congregation. Any one who behaves different to this basis, is condemned by the Church canon to isolate him or dispossess him from his rank.

+ Patriarch has the right to ordain bishops. Two bishops or at least one bishop must accompany him. No ordination of bishops takes place if the Patriarchal See is void.

+ Patriarch has the right to promote the bishop to the rank of metropolitan.

+ Patriarch has the right to make Myron whenever it approaches depletion, while the bishops and metropolitans share its making.
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2008, 08:26:00 PM »

I've become fond of The Truth What Every Orthodox should know about Roman Catholicism by Clark Carlton book, especially the point he makes about how the Byzantine Empire is a misnomer and the Charlemagne tale.  Differences in Ecclesiology? Of course.  I would reference back to that chapter/section of the book if you want my answer to this thread. 
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2008, 08:51:56 PM »

Let me preface this by stating that this thread is NOT directly about the papacy and I don't want to get into discussion about the papacy in this thread. So what is this thread about?

The Eastern Orthodox make the claim that their ecclesiology is how the Church has operated since day one. That Bishops all have equal authority and such and that any such privileges for a "higher up" such as a Patriarch are merely honorary (which I take to mean first in the buffet line and sit at the head table). It also seem to me, from what I have observed, that in praxis that the laity have just as much if not more authority in presenting the faith than the Bishops.

Don't know what you've been observing, as such is not the case.

And it's more than just first in line at the buffet.  But I'm sure we'll get into that.

Quote
If that is the case, that the Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is the way the Church has always operated, why is it that the ecclesiology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches, which left communion with Rome and Constantinople in the 5th century, is closer to that of the Catholic Church than the Eastern Orthodox Church.


You've been listening to Mardukhm too much.

Quote
The Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology has a definite sense of hierarchial authority that carries real prerogatives and jurisdictional oversight.

Like, we'll get into it.

Quote
For example, in the Syriac Orthodox Church:


Church Hierarchy

The supreme head of the Syriac Orthodox Church is the Patriarch of Antioch and all the East. He also presides over the Holy Synod, the assembly of all bishops.

No difference here from Patriarch Ignatius IV (EO).

Quote
The local head of the church in Malankara (India) is the Catholicos of the East. The Catholicos is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Antioch and is accountable to the Holy Synod and the local Malankara Synod. He is consecrated by the Patriarch and presides over the local Holy Synod.

No different from the Autonomous Antiochean Archdiocese of America.

Quote
The local head of every archdiocese is an archbishop. He is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch and is accountable to the Holy Synod. The archbishop is ordained by the Patriarch and at least two bishops. Some archdioceses are ‘patriarchal vicarates’; the patriarchal vicar, regardless of ecclesiastical office, is accountable directly to the Patriarch.[/i]

Ditto.


Quote
Bishop Kaloustian (former Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople) writes in "Saints and Sacraments of the Armenian Church":

The office of Catholicos is the highest office in the Armenian Church. The Catholicos is the head of the whole Armenian Church. It is a Greek word meaning General. The full title of the head of the Armenian Church is “Supreme Patriarch Catholicos of All Armenians.


The website of the Armenian Apostolic Church states:

The Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians is the worldwide spiritual leader of the Nation, for Armenians both in Armenia and in the Dispersion.  He is Chief Shepherd and Pontiff to nearly 9 million Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Christians, dispersed throughout the world.

The supreme head of the Church is Jesus Christ.  In the hierarchy of the Armenian Apostolic Church the Catholicos, a Greek term signifying “Universal Leader of the Church”, ranks higher than Patriarchs, Archbishops and Bishops in the Armenian Church.  He is typically chosen from the College of Bishops, and once elected is regarded as the “First Among Equals."  The Catholicos is consecrated by 12 bishops.

The Catholicos represents the centralized authority of the Armenian Church.  He is the supreme judge and the head of the legislative body.  He is President of the Supreme Spiritual Council as well as the College of Bishops.  Ordination of bishops, blessing of Holy Chrism, proclamation of Feasts, invitation and dismissal of National-Ecclesiastical Assemblies, issuing decrees concerning the administration of the Armenian Church and establishing dioceses are part of his responsibilities.

No different that EP and the Greeks, except in Cyprus and PART of Greece.


Quote
In the Armenian Apostolic Church, only the Catholicos has the prerogative to bless the Holy Myron for distribution to all the local Churches under him.

No different from any autocephalous EO primate.



Quote
According to a website for the Coptic Orthodox Church:

+ The Patriarch is the highest rank in the bishopric level and has the highest or greatest ruling of priesthood.

+ Patriarch is the leader of the Church, bishops and all metropolitans.

+ Patriarch is the successor of the Apostles and first father of the Church.

+ Patriarch is symbol of unity of Church: around when priests, deacons and bishops gather with all the congregation. Any one who behaves different to this basis, is condemned by the Church canon to isolate him or dispossess him from his rank.

+ Patriarch has the right to ordain bishops. Two bishops or at least one bishop must accompany him. No ordination of bishops takes place if the Patriarchal See is void.

+ Patriarch has the right to promote the bishop to the rank of metropolitan.

+ Patriarch has the right to make Myron whenever it approaches depletion, while the bishops and metropolitans share its making.


This one has problems, but I'd like if a Copt (and I mean an ORTHODOX Copt) replies first, so I'll hold off for now to answer.

There is an issue that, like Rome, the OO Alexandria, Antioch and Armenia didn't act like the EO Patriarchates together, and only delt, and in some isolation with subordinates (Ethiopia, India, Georgia), like Rome and her Western backyard.  I.e. while the Syrians talk about the Patriarch of Antioch being supreme, the Copts saying Alexandria is supreme, and the Armenians saying Ethcimdizn is supreme, no one talks about the realtionship between Alexandria, Antioch and Etchimandzin between each other.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2008, 08:56:22 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,942


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2008, 10:36:37 PM »

If that is the case, that the Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is the way the Church has always operated, why is it that the ecclesiology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches, which left communion with Rome and Constantinople in the 5th century, is closer to that of the Catholic Church than the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology has a definite sense of hierarchial authority that carries real prerogatives and jurisdictional oversight.
Can you define what you mean by Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology, just so we can make sure you understand it correctly?  The way you present your question also makes you appear to assume that Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology is older merely because it's more like yours.  Yet merely looking at what traits each ecclesiology possesses TODAY is not proof that any of them is older than any other.  How do you know that OO ecclesiology has not evolved since Chalcedon?  We would certainly argue that Rome's ecclesiology has.
Logged
username!
Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ukrainian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvaniadoxy
Posts: 5,070



« Reply #4 on: December 24, 2008, 10:49:11 PM »

The problem I have found is that when say EO and Roman Catholics are speaking they may be using the same terms but the concepts are different.  This is so often overlooked and to fully understand say the EO ecclesiology and the Roman Catholic structure one must have a firm grasp on both systems.  This is often not the case and people end up walking away with misconceptions of one another because they were using the same terms but yet different definitions and neither knew or understood it. 
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #5 on: December 24, 2008, 11:41:55 PM »

If that is the case, that the Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is the way the Church has always operated, why is it that the ecclesiology of the Oriental Orthodox Churches, which left communion with Rome and Constantinople in the 5th century, is closer to that of the Catholic Church than the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology has a definite sense of hierarchial authority that carries real prerogatives and jurisdictional oversight.
Can you define what you mean by Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology, just so we can make sure you understand it correctly?  The way you present your question also makes you appear to assume that Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology is older merely because it's more like yours.  Yet merely looking at what traits each ecclesiology possesses TODAY is not proof that any of them is older than any other.  How do you know that OO ecclesiology has not evolved since Chalcedon?  We would certainly argue that Rome's ecclesiology has.

I was going to give him the anachronism.  He still won't be able to prove his case.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #6 on: December 24, 2008, 11:43:36 PM »

The problem I have found is that when say EO and Roman Catholics are speaking they may be using the same terms but the concepts are different.  This is so often overlooked and to fully understand say the EO ecclesiology and the Roman Catholic structure one must have a firm grasp on both systems.  This is often not the case and people end up walking away with misconceptions of one another because they were using the same terms but yet different definitions and neither knew or understood it. 

The problem is that when the EO and OO use the same terms, they mean the same concepts.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2008, 11:43:13 PM »

And it's more than just first in line at the buffet.  But I'm sure we'll get into that.

I hope so, I've never received an actual answer on what precisely is meant by "primacy of honor".
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
Athanasios
Latin Rite Catholic faithful to the Holy Father and the Magisterium
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Church Diocese of Youngstown
Posts: 1,800


The Divine Mercy


« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2008, 11:49:23 PM »

Can you define what you mean by Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology, just so we can make sure you understand it correctly?  The way you present your question also makes you appear to assume that Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology is older merely because it's more like yours.  Yet merely looking at what traits each ecclesiology possesses TODAY is not proof that any of them is older than any other.  How do you know that OO ecclesiology has not evolved since Chalcedon?  We would certainly argue that Rome's ecclesiology has.

The way I view Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is that each Bishop has the exact same authority as every other Bishop and no Bishop has any authority outside of his own local Church. The only inter-Church jurisdiction exists in a Synod of Bishops. Also, the laity appear to have an equal authority in teaching the faith, and it sometimes appears they have more authority, especially in praxis. This was demonstrated recently when the Athonite monks severely censured the EP for dialoging and praying with the Pope.


The point I am making is that since the Oriental Orthodox left full communion with Rome and Constantinople long before the schism, if Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is truly how the Church operated in the first millenium, then the Oriental Orthodox should be nearly identical (since they haven't been influenced by being in communion with either Church).
Logged

Through the intercession of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, may Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Pray that we may be one, as Christ and His Father are one. (John 17:20ff)

A.K.A. - JMJ_coder
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #9 on: December 31, 2008, 01:00:05 AM »

And it's more than just first in line at the buffet.  But I'm sure we'll get into that.

I hope so, I've never received an actual answer on what precisely is meant by "primacy of honor".


I think you have, but not to get into that, what you give as examples of OO ecclesiology, e.g. the primate alone blessing the myron, are also the same case among the EO.  (and against the Vatican: does the Vatican bless the chrism for confirmation around the world?).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #10 on: December 31, 2008, 01:07:52 AM »

Can you define what you mean by Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology, just so we can make sure you understand it correctly?  The way you present your question also makes you appear to assume that Oriental Orthodox ecclesiology is older merely because it's more like yours.  Yet merely looking at what traits each ecclesiology possesses TODAY is not proof that any of them is older than any other.  How do you know that OO ecclesiology has not evolved since Chalcedon?  We would certainly argue that Rome's ecclesiology has.

The way I view Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is that each Bishop has the exact same authority as every other Bishop and no Bishop has any authority outside of his own local Church. The only inter-Church jurisdiction exists in a Synod of Bishops. Also, the laity appear to have an equal authority in teaching the faith, and it sometimes appears they have more authority, especially in praxis.
What seems to be bothering you is not that the Faithful have more say than the bishop (which is not the case), but that they have ANY say.

Quote
This was demonstrated recently when the Athonite monks severely censured the EP for dialoging and praying with the Pope.

I seem to recall those nasty monks also given an hard time to the iconoclast EPs.


Quote
The point I am making is that since the Oriental Orthodox left full communion with Rome and Constantinople long before the schism, if Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology is truly how the Church operated in the first millenium, then the Oriental Orthodox should be nearly identical (since they haven't been influenced by being in communion with either Church).

This is bases on a couple of assumptions, one of which has been pointed out: that it assumes that there has been no change in the OO, as we know that there has been change in the Vatican.

And as I have suggested, the relative isolation of Coptic Alexandria, Syriac Antioch, Armenia, Ethiopia and India matches that of Rome.  For example, Rome alone has never had her patriarch attend a single Ecumenical Council.  If the OO were like the Vatican (and I've yet to see that), the similar circumstances would go a long way in explaining it.

Even given that, though, I still haven't seen any similarity to the Vatican, and a dissimilarity to the EO among the OO.  Except some of the points made in the Copt you quote, which I would like a Copt to respond to before I do.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 30,228


that is not the teaching of...


« Reply #11 on: December 31, 2008, 01:50:41 AM »

Quote
Also, the laity appear to have an equal authority in teaching the faith, and it sometimes appears they have more authority, especially in praxis. This was demonstrated recently when the Athonite monks severely censured the EP for dialoging and praying with the Pope.

It's probably true that, traditionally, the laity had more of a teaching role in the East than they did in the West, though this would differ from location to location, and person to person. Some Fathers, like Gregory the Theologian, were not so much in favor of the laity teaching certain theological matters. I don't know whether there are any equivalents to people like St. Nicholas Cabasilas (an Orthodox lay theologian) in the Catholic Church?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #12 on: January 05, 2009, 04:49:07 PM »

According to a website for the Coptic Orthodox Church:
This one has problems, but I'd like if a Copt (and I mean an ORTHODOX Copt) replies first, so I'll hold off for now to answer.

Since no Copt has seen or at least has not responded to it, I thought I might as well go ahead.

Quote
+ The Patriarch is the highest rank in the bishopric level and has the highest or greatest ruling of priesthood.

What exactly is that "greatest ruling of priesthood?"  What exactly makes him different in this regard that the EO Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria.  Perhaps, more to the point, how is he different that his counterparts that have submitted to the Vatican?  I use "counterpart" loosely in the last regard, as they cannpt have the title "Pope," as does both EO and OO Patriarch of Alexandria.

I'll admit, this talk of a "highest/greatest ruling of priesthood" can be disturbing. What does it mean?  Does it mean more than the EO Pope's title "Archpriest of Archpriest?"

Otherwise, of course the Patriarch is the highest rank at the episcopal level.  Not, it puts him at a level with this collegues, and the title "Pope" does not put him above them, like the EO and unlike the Vatican.

Quote
+ Patriarch is the leader of the Church, bishops and all metropolitans.

Different from the EO Pope how?

Nothing diffrent than his EO counterpart.

Quote
+ Patriarch is the successor of the Apostles and first father of the Church.

Is there a bishop who ISN'T a succesor of the Apostles? (at least among the Orthodox bishops, EO and OO).

Do the Copts claim that Pope Shenouda is the first father of the Church and successor of the Apostles over the Patriarchs of Antioch, Armenia, etc.?

First father?  Like PATRiarch (lit. Father-Ruler)

Or better POPE?  Ooops.  Forgot.  Those in Alexandria under the Vatican don't have that title: you have to be the Orthodox, EO or OO, Patriarch of Alexandria to have that.

Quote
+ Patriarch is symbol of unity of Church: around when priests, deacons and bishops gather with all the congregation. Any one who behaves different to this basis, is condemned by the Church canon to isolate him or dispossess him from his rank.

This language comes close to the "visible head" line.  How far back does it go?  As some have noted, that HH Pope Shenoudah has considerably "Byzantinized" (meaning, elaborated) ceremony, and adopted some of the trappings of that Vatican has.

Still, an important distinction: he is the "symbol of unity," not the "source of unity" as the Vatican claims for itself.

Quote
+ Patriarch has the right to ordain bishops. Two bishops or at least one bishop must accompany him. No ordination of bishops takes place if the Patriarchal See is void.

Again, the difference between him and the EO?

The OCA case is interesting: there was an ordination while the Metropolitan's seat was vacant (I think is what you meant by "void"), but that turned out (or was it already known), it was the new Metropolitan. Any canonists?

Quote
+ Patriarch has the right to promote the bishop to the rank of metropolitan.

No difference again.

Quote
+ Patriarch has the right to make Myron whenever it approaches depletion, while the bishops and metropolitans share its making. [/i]

No difference.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Tags: ecclesiology 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.089 seconds with 42 queries.