(hope i'm not resurrecting an old topic)
Much of my attention has been turned recently to the contrasting ecclesiological models dividing East and West like an impenetrable wall - Eucharistic and Universal ecclesiology, respectively.
Orthodox theologians seem unanimous that both are mutually exclusive. The concept of Eucharistic ecclesiology precludes the notion of having a single Bishop exercising power above all the churches (which is embedded in Universal ecclesiology), but allows for a single church to act as one having greater authority, or priority among the others, a church mirroring the image of Christ by sacrificing for the others and presiding in love, as St. Ignatius of Antioch referred to the Roman church in his epistle.
That having been said, how do Eastern Catholics reconcile the mandatory acceptance of a dogma and its necessary ecclesiological model (c.f. First Vatican Council) totally foreign to the Eastern conscience, with Vatican II’s decree for all Eastern Catholic churches to restore their Eastern traditions and heritage? Doesn’t the Eastern ecclesiological model fall under ‘tradition’? Unless I’ve missed something this seems to be a dilemma. Seems restoring one’s traditions inevitably means becoming Orthodox.
Clarifications would be appreciated.