Author Topic: Eastern Catholics  (Read 34831 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #225 on: August 01, 2011, 06:26:06 PM »
When the bishops of the "Romanian Catholic Church" can act as ordinaries in Romania, I'll concede your view.  But since the Latin Church can plop its bishops done in Romania, along with there own rules, and not answerable to the alleged "Romanian Catholic Church," while the Romanians can't even exercise jurisdiction over the Romanians in submission to the Vatican in Italy, I won't be fooled by your Vatican's empty phrases, especially as it has been dawdling for years to let the "Eastern sui juris churches" so called to impliment their own canons, e.g. married clergy.

but nothing like this:

http://www.rogca.org/a8-Romanian-Greek-Catholic-Church-responds-to-the-intention-of-the-Orthodox-Church-to-lobby-for-legalization-of-the-cultural-and-religious-cleansing-in-Romania.aspx

The Romanian Greek-Catholic Church is concerned about the statement released by the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchy on September 29, 2009, which incites religious hatred and supports the process of cultural and religious cleansing that the Greek-Catholic Church is currently facing in Romania.

I understand.  Because the Romanian Orthodox Church is acting against the interests of the Romanian Catholic Church that justifies the Roman Catholic Church attacking the Romanian Catholics in Italy. It's all in the interests of preserving religious integrity in the nation.  Makes perfect sense.

Means y'all should tend to your own knittin'...

The Roman Catholic attack on the Romanian Catholic parishes and married clergy in Italy may very well become our business.
Being of Italian heritage, I might be showing a bias, but let's evangelize Italy! :) I'm not too clear on the numbers of U-word folks in comparison to the Orthodox, so the obstinacy of the established Latin hierarchy could give us another St. Alexis of Wilkes-Barre with the same results (Lord willing).

In Christ,
Andrew

Seems to me that it would have done so already...

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #226 on: August 01, 2011, 06:27:04 PM »
Sigh. The silly back and forth over the word 'Catholic' is as sophisticated and productive as the Version 1.0 of the video game 'Pong.' (For those of you too young to know what I mean, it was a simple back and forth of a blip that could go on for hours, mesmerizing those who were the first generation exposed to what would become video gaming and it was a waste of time and gave one a headache. Just like the typical derailment of this thread.)

As one who has lived in the midst of communities and families rendered by the split among the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholics I have several points from my perspective:

    a. Latin rite Catholics have never and currently do NOT understand the Eastern Catholic Churches.

    b. Latin rite Catholics will never and do NOT accept any theological or ecclesial distinctions between the Latin church and the Easterners even if the 'sui juris' Eastern Churches thoughtfully and intelligently proclaim an argument that such differences exist and are proper within their view of the 'universal' church. (see for example many writings from the Melkites and some of the essays of Cardinal Lubomir Husar.)

    c.  For the most part Latin rite Catholics would rejoice if the Eastern Catholics would 'see the light' and  just go away and become 'real' Catholics.

    d. Orthodox with no experience in having Eastern Catholics living in their lands or within their communities are as befuddled with them as are the Latins. They too would rejoice if the Eastern Catholics would just go away and become Roman Catholics. Orthodox would be preferable, but they aren't picky.

    e. Like the late comedian Rodney Dangerfield, Eastern Catholics get no respect, either from the Church of Rome or from the Orthodox world as a whole.

The triumphalist and snide type of exchange from Orthodox and Roman posters alike that has gone on and on here serves no real purpose and merely supports my arguments as outlined above.

Father A. has raised a valid point regarding the status of the Romanians in Italy and an issue that will only increase over the years as migration within the EU continues. The times are a changing for the Eastern Catholic church of eastern Europe and if the American experience is any example as to how the Roman and Orthodox world will deal with them, rough days are indeed ahead for them outside of their traditional homelands.

« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 06:32:03 PM by podkarpatska »

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #227 on: August 01, 2011, 06:27:34 PM »
Sodano was overruled on this by the pope, Father Ambrose.


Proof?


Google it.  I simply remember it from the time.  It was not supported by the Vatican.

I have googled it.  It is not there.

Well it takes some searching.  I found it this morning.  No.  I didn't save it.

You don't have to save it.  It will be in your History Folder.  Just look in "Today"

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #228 on: August 01, 2011, 06:30:05 PM »
When the bishops of the "Romanian Catholic Church" can act as ordinaries in Romania, I'll concede your view.  But since the Latin Church can plop its bishops done in Romania, along with there own rules, and not answerable to the alleged "Romanian Catholic Church," while the Romanians can't even exercise jurisdiction over the Romanians in submission to the Vatican in Italy, I won't be fooled by your Vatican's empty phrases, especially as it has been dawdling for years to let the "Eastern sui juris churches" so called to impliment their own canons, e.g. married clergy.

but nothing like this:

http://www.rogca.org/a8-Romanian-Greek-Catholic-Church-responds-to-the-intention-of-the-Orthodox-Church-to-lobby-for-legalization-of-the-cultural-and-religious-cleansing-in-Romania.aspx

The Romanian Greek-Catholic Church is concerned about the statement released by the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchy on September 29, 2009, which incites religious hatred and supports the process of cultural and religious cleansing that the Greek-Catholic Church is currently facing in Romania.

I understand.  Because the Romanian Orthodox Church is acting against the interests of the Romanian Catholic Church that justifies the Roman Catholic Church attacking the Romanian Catholics in Italy. It's all in the interests of preserving religious integrity in the nation.  Makes perfect sense.

Means y'all should tend to your own knittin'...

The Roman Catholic attack on the Romanian Catholic parishes and married clergy in Italy may very well become our business.
Being of Italian heritage, I might be showing a bias, but let's evangelize Italy! :) I'm not too clear on the numbers of U-word folks in comparison to the Orthodox, so the obstinacy of the established Latin hierarchy could give us another St. Alexis of Wilkes-Barre with the same results (Lord willing).

In Christ,
Andrew

Seems to me that it would have done so already...
Maybe so. I can't recall how long they were in the US when things went crazy with Bp. Ireland. Maybe things in Italy will improve for them or maybe they'll wise up. ;)

In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #229 on: August 01, 2011, 06:31:05 PM »
Sodano was overruled on this by the pope, Father Ambrose.


Proof?


Google it.  I simply remember it from the time.  It was not supported by the Vatican.

I have googled it.  It is not there.

Well it takes some searching.  I found it this morning.  No.  I didn't save it.

You don't have to save it.  It will be in your History Folder.  Just look in "Today"

I have twenty or thirty links from the same several searches.  I am not going to go over them again.  This is a relaxing time for me...so I am relaxing before I am on to put out the next very real brush fire here...see?  You don't need to believe me or quote me...you can even call me a liar if you like...It's all ok..

PS:  My Firefox is also messing up and not holding my histories in the proper order and things I look at today may not show up for days or not at all..buggy!!
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 06:32:21 PM by elijahmaria »

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #230 on: August 01, 2011, 06:33:51 PM »
When the bishops of the "Romanian Catholic Church" can act as ordinaries in Romania, I'll concede your view.  But since the Latin Church can plop its bishops done in Romania, along with there own rules, and not answerable to the alleged "Romanian Catholic Church," while the Romanians can't even exercise jurisdiction over the Romanians in submission to the Vatican in Italy, I won't be fooled by your Vatican's empty phrases, especially as it has been dawdling for years to let the "Eastern sui juris churches" so called to impliment their own canons, e.g. married clergy.

but nothing like this:

http://www.rogca.org/a8-Romanian-Greek-Catholic-Church-responds-to-the-intention-of-the-Orthodox-Church-to-lobby-for-legalization-of-the-cultural-and-religious-cleansing-in-Romania.aspx

The Romanian Greek-Catholic Church is concerned about the statement released by the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchy on September 29, 2009, which incites religious hatred and supports the process of cultural and religious cleansing that the Greek-Catholic Church is currently facing in Romania.

I understand.  Because the Romanian Orthodox Church is acting against the interests of the Romanian Catholic Church that justifies the Roman Catholic Church attacking the Romanian Catholics in Italy. It's all in the interests of preserving religious integrity in the nation.  Makes perfect sense.

Means y'all should tend to your own knittin'...

The Roman Catholic attack on the Romanian Catholic parishes and married clergy in Italy may very well become our business.
Being of Italian heritage, I might be showing a bias, but let's evangelize Italy! :) I'm not too clear on the numbers of U-word folks in comparison to the Orthodox, so the obstinacy of the established Latin hierarchy could give us another St. Alexis of Wilkes-Barre with the same results (Lord willing).

In Christ,
Andrew

Seems to me that it would have done so already...
Maybe so. I can't recall how long they were in the US when things went crazy with Bp. Ireland. Maybe things in Italy will improve for them or maybe they'll wise up. ;)

In Christ,
Andrew

I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #231 on: August 01, 2011, 06:34:18 PM »
When the bishops of the "Romanian Catholic Church" can act as ordinaries in Romania, I'll concede your view.  But since the Latin Church can plop its bishops done in Romania, along with there own rules, and not answerable to the alleged "Romanian Catholic Church," while the Romanians can't even exercise jurisdiction over the Romanians in submission to the Vatican in Italy, I won't be fooled by your Vatican's empty phrases, especially as it has been dawdling for years to let the "Eastern sui juris churches" so called to impliment their own canons, e.g. married clergy.

but nothing like this:

http://www.rogca.org/a8-Romanian-Greek-Catholic-Church-responds-to-the-intention-of-the-Orthodox-Church-to-lobby-for-legalization-of-the-cultural-and-religious-cleansing-in-Romania.aspx

The Romanian Greek-Catholic Church is concerned about the statement released by the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchy on September 29, 2009, which incites religious hatred and supports the process of cultural and religious cleansing that the Greek-Catholic Church is currently facing in Romania.

I understand.  Because the Romanian Orthodox Church is acting against the interests of the Romanian Catholic Church that justifies the Roman Catholic Church attacking the Romanian Catholics in Italy. It's all in the interests of preserving religious integrity in the nation.  Makes perfect sense.

Means y'all should tend to your own knittin'...

The Roman Catholic attack on the Romanian Catholic parishes and married clergy in Italy may very well become our business.
Being of Italian heritage, I might be showing a bias, but let's evangelize Italy! :) I'm not too clear on the numbers of U-word folks in comparison to the Orthodox, so the obstinacy of the established Latin hierarchy could give us another St. Alexis of Wilkes-Barre with the same results (Lord willing).

In Christ,
Andrew

Seems to me that it would have done so already...
Maybe so. I can't recall how long they were in the US when things went crazy with Bp. Ireland. Maybe things in Italy will improve for them or maybe they'll wise up. ;)

In Christ,
Andrew

About ten years, the first Ukrainian Greek Catholic parish was established in Shenendoah, PA about 1885 and St. Mary's Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church in Freeland, PA was established  in 1887

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #232 on: August 01, 2011, 06:36:10 PM »
When the bishops of the "Romanian Catholic Church" can act as ordinaries in Romania, I'll concede your view.  But since the Latin Church can plop its bishops done in Romania, along with there own rules, and not answerable to the alleged "Romanian Catholic Church," while the Romanians can't even exercise jurisdiction over the Romanians in submission to the Vatican in Italy, I won't be fooled by your Vatican's empty phrases, especially as it has been dawdling for years to let the "Eastern sui juris churches" so called to impliment their own canons, e.g. married clergy.

but nothing like this:

http://www.rogca.org/a8-Romanian-Greek-Catholic-Church-responds-to-the-intention-of-the-Orthodox-Church-to-lobby-for-legalization-of-the-cultural-and-religious-cleansing-in-Romania.aspx

The Romanian Greek-Catholic Church is concerned about the statement released by the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchy on September 29, 2009, which incites religious hatred and supports the process of cultural and religious cleansing that the Greek-Catholic Church is currently facing in Romania.

I understand.  Because the Romanian Orthodox Church is acting against the interests of the Romanian Catholic Church that justifies the Roman Catholic Church attacking the Romanian Catholics in Italy. It's all in the interests of preserving religious integrity in the nation.  Makes perfect sense.

Means y'all should tend to your own knittin'...

The Roman Catholic attack on the Romanian Catholic parishes and married clergy in Italy may very well become our business.
Being of Italian heritage, I might be showing a bias, but let's evangelize Italy! :) I'm not too clear on the numbers of U-word folks in comparison to the Orthodox, so the obstinacy of the established Latin hierarchy could give us another St. Alexis of Wilkes-Barre with the same results (Lord willing).

In Christ,
Andrew

Seems to me that it would have done so already...
Maybe so. I can't recall how long they were in the US when things went crazy with Bp. Ireland. Maybe things in Italy will improve for them or maybe they'll wise up. ;)

In Christ,
Andrew

I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.

If Rome makes the mistake of suppressing the Eastern Rite as they did in the past in the United States, there surely will be some, if not many, Romanians and Ukrainians living outside of their historical homelands who will seek refuge in Orthodoxy, but never through Moscow.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #233 on: August 01, 2011, 06:37:18 PM »

I have twenty or thirty links from the same several searches.  I am not going to go over them again.  This is a relaxing time for me...so I am relaxing before I am on to put out the next very real brush fire here...see?  You don't need to believe me or quote me...you can even call me a liar if you like...It's all ok..

"you can even call me a liar if you like...It's all ok.."  I am surprised that a learned catechist would try and lead me into an occasion of serious sin.  Matthew 5:22   :-[

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #234 on: August 01, 2011, 06:38:14 PM »
When the bishops of the "Romanian Catholic Church" can act as ordinaries in Romania, I'll concede your view.  But since the Latin Church can plop its bishops done in Romania, along with there own rules, and not answerable to the alleged "Romanian Catholic Church," while the Romanians can't even exercise jurisdiction over the Romanians in submission to the Vatican in Italy, I won't be fooled by your Vatican's empty phrases, especially as it has been dawdling for years to let the "Eastern sui juris churches" so called to impliment their own canons, e.g. married clergy.

but nothing like this:

http://www.rogca.org/a8-Romanian-Greek-Catholic-Church-responds-to-the-intention-of-the-Orthodox-Church-to-lobby-for-legalization-of-the-cultural-and-religious-cleansing-in-Romania.aspx

The Romanian Greek-Catholic Church is concerned about the statement released by the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchy on September 29, 2009, which incites religious hatred and supports the process of cultural and religious cleansing that the Greek-Catholic Church is currently facing in Romania.

I understand.  Because the Romanian Orthodox Church is acting against the interests of the Romanian Catholic Church that justifies the Roman Catholic Church attacking the Romanian Catholics in Italy. It's all in the interests of preserving religious integrity in the nation.  Makes perfect sense.

Means y'all should tend to your own knittin'...
we are:


Quote
The Statute for Organization and Functioning of the Romanian Orthodox Bishoprick of Italy
ART. 3-(1)The members by right of the bishoprick are the Romanian Orthodox Christians (including clergy and monastics), as well as persons canonically received into its communities, [persons] which have their domicile or residence in the Italian Republic, the Republic of San Marino and the Republic of Malta.
(2) Persons who wish to be received into the communities of the bishoprick can be accepted only after an appropriate period of catechesis, and after their sincere and free will is verified.
http://episcopia-italiei.it/media/statut_eori.pdf

Let us, the faithful, praise the Priest Alexis,
A bright beacon of Orthodoxy in America,
A model of patience and humility,
A worthy shepherd of the Flock of Christ.
He called back the sheep who had been led astray
And brought them by his preaching
To the Heavenly Kingdom!
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

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #235 on: August 01, 2011, 06:39:49 PM »

I have twenty or thirty links from the same several searches.  I am not going to go over them again.  This is a relaxing time for me...so I am relaxing before I am on to put out the next very real brush fire here...see?  You don't need to believe me or quote me...you can even call me a liar if you like...It's all ok..

"you can even call me a liar if you like...It's all ok.."  I am surprised that a learned catechist would try and lead me into an occasion of serious sin.  Matthew 5:22   :-[

LOL...oh well...that was not my intent

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #236 on: August 01, 2011, 06:41:12 PM »
^ Here we go with the picture of this poor Bishop again. This entire type of conversation led me to quit back in June. Perhaps with the Dormition Fast upon us, it's time to rest again.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #237 on: August 01, 2011, 06:44:06 PM »
Sigh. The silly back and forth over the word 'Catholic' is as sophisticated and productive as the Version 1.0 of the video game 'Pong.' (For those of you too young to know what I mean, it was a simple back and forth of a blip that could go on for hours, mesmerizing those who were the first generation exposed to what would become video gaming and it was a waste of time and gave one a headache. Just like the typical derailment of this thread.)

As one who has lived in the midst of communities and families rendered by the split among the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholics I have several points from my perspective:

    a. Latin rite Catholics have never and currently do NOT understand the Eastern Catholic Churches.

    b. Latin rite Catholics will never and do NOT accept any theological or ecclesial distinctions between the Latin church and the Easterners even if the 'sui juris' Eastern Churches thoughtfully and intelligently proclaim an argument that such differences exist and are proper within their view of the 'universal' church. (see for example many writings from the Melkites and some of the essays of Cardinal Lubomir Husar.)

    c.  For the most part Latin rite Catholics would rejoice if the Eastern Catholics would 'see the light' and  just go away and become 'real' Catholics.

    d. Orthodox with no experience in having Eastern Catholics living in their lands or within their communities are as befuddled with them as are the Latins. They too would rejoice if the Eastern Catholics would just go away and become Roman Catholics. Orthodox would be preferable, but they aren't picky.

    e. Like the late comedian Rodney Dangerfield, Eastern Catholics get no respect, either from the Church of Rome or from the Orthodox world as a whole.

The triumphalist and snide type of exchange from Orthodox and Roman posters alike that has gone on and on here serves no real purpose and merely supports my arguments as outlined above.

Father A. has raised a valid point regarding the status of the Romanians in Italy and an issue that will only increase over the years as migration within the EU continues. The times are a changing for the Eastern Catholic church of eastern Europe and if the American experience is any example as to how the Roman and Orthodox world will deal with them, rough days are indeed ahead for them outside of their traditional homelands.
Not as rough as your ancestors experienced, out in the wilderness of North America, with a foreign Orthodox hierarchy and a foreign Latin hierarchy.  The Romanians already have a nice Romanian Orthodox diocese with its own bishop who would be quite willing, able and happy to welcome them back home in a language they speak.
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

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #238 on: August 01, 2011, 06:51:36 PM »
Sigh. The silly back and forth over the word 'Catholic' is as sophisticated and productive as the Version 1.0 of the video game 'Pong.' (For those of you too young to know what I mean, it was a simple back and forth of a blip that could go on for hours, mesmerizing those who were the first generation exposed to what would become video gaming and it was a waste of time and gave one a headache. Just like the typical derailment of this thread.)

As one who has lived in the midst of communities and families rendered by the split among the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholics I have several points from my perspective:

    a. Latin rite Catholics have never and currently do NOT understand the Eastern Catholic Churches.

    b. Latin rite Catholics will never and do NOT accept any theological or ecclesial distinctions between the Latin church and the Easterners even if the 'sui juris' Eastern Churches thoughtfully and intelligently proclaim an argument that such differences exist and are proper within their view of the 'universal' church. (see for example many writings from the Melkites and some of the essays of Cardinal Lubomir Husar.)

    c.  For the most part Latin rite Catholics would rejoice if the Eastern Catholics would 'see the light' and  just go away and become 'real' Catholics.

    d. Orthodox with no experience in having Eastern Catholics living in their lands or within their communities are as befuddled with them as are the Latins. They too would rejoice if the Eastern Catholics would just go away and become Roman Catholics. Orthodox would be preferable, but they aren't picky.

    e. Like the late comedian Rodney Dangerfield, Eastern Catholics get no respect, either from the Church of Rome or from the Orthodox world as a whole.

The triumphalist and snide type of exchange from Orthodox and Roman posters alike that has gone on and on here serves no real purpose and merely supports my arguments as outlined above.

Father A. has raised a valid point regarding the status of the Romanians in Italy and an issue that will only increase over the years as migration within the EU continues. The times are a changing for the Eastern Catholic church of eastern Europe and if the American experience is any example as to how the Roman and Orthodox world will deal with them, rough days are indeed ahead for them outside of their traditional homelands.
Not as rough as your ancestors experienced, out in the wilderness of North America, with a foreign Orthodox hierarchy and a foreign Latin hierarchy.  The Romanians already have a nice Romanian Orthodox diocese with its own bishop who would be quite willing, able and happy to welcome them back home in a language they speak.

Materially this is true, had there been a non-Russian Orthodox component church for the Ukrainians or the Ruthenians to have chosen in the latter 19th and early 20th century in America, Orthodox history in America would likely have been vastly different than it turned out. Sadly, there was no independent Orthodox church for either the Ukrainians or the Ruthenians of that era as the same had been suppressed in the homelands for centuries by politicians and hierarchs aligned with either Rome or Moscow! So, you may be correct in that Romanian Orthodoxy has preserved its own cultural and ethnic identity apart from Moscow or Constantinople and may provide a safe haven. Unfortunately, there is other 'baggage' that the unions created which has much to do with 20th century politics so I still believe that times will be hard.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 06:52:30 PM by podkarpatska »

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #239 on: August 01, 2011, 06:53:54 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Many already have. Just looking out for the stragglers.
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

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #240 on: August 01, 2011, 06:59:14 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Many already have. Just looking out for the stragglers.

There are more than a few stragglers left.  Or you and Father Ambrose would not get so vehement and ugly... ;)

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #241 on: August 01, 2011, 07:11:36 PM »
There's no such thing as "Romanian rite bishops". There's a Romanian Catholic Church (it uses the Byzantine Rite).

"Churches"?  Pshaw!   That's a new-fangled piece of meaningless feel-good vocabulary crafted after Vatican II.

They've always been known as (in this case)  "Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite."

It's certainly true that they have sometimes been called that, but how far back does it go? For example, were they called that in the agreement of the Union of Brest? Or is it just something from the last couple centuries?
Less than a century:
Quote
The definition of an Eastern-Rite Catholic is: A Christian of any Eastern rite in union with the pope: i.e. a Catholic who belongs not to the Roman, but to an Eastern rite. They differ from other Eastern Christians in that they are in communion with Rome, and from Latins in that they have other rites.

A curious, but entirely theoretic, question of terminology is: Are Milanese and Mozarabic considered Eastern Rite Catholics? If we make rite our basis, they are. That is, they are Catholics who do not belong to the Roman Rite. The point has sometimes been urged rather as a catch than seriously. As a matter of fact, the real basis, though it is superficially less obvious than rite, is patriarchate. Eastern-Rite Catholics are Catholics who do not belong to the Roman patriarchate. So these two remnants of other rites in the West do not constitute Eastern-Rite Churches. In the West, rite does not always follow patriarchate; the great Gallican Church, with her own rite, was always part of the Roman patriarchate; so are Milan and Toledo. This, however, raises a new difficulty; for it may be urged that in that case the Italo-Greeks are not Eastern Catholics, since they certainly belong to the Roman patriarchate. They do, of course; and they always have done so legally. But the constitution of these Italo-Greek Churches was originally the result of an attempt on the part of the Eastern emperors (Leo III, 717-741, especially; see "Orth. Eastern Church", 45-47) to filch them from the Roman patriarchate and join them to that of Constantinople. Although the attempt did not succeed, the descendants of the Greeks in Calabria, Sicily, etc., have kept the Byzantine Rite. They are an exception to the rule, invariable in the East, that rite follows patriarchate, and are an exception to the general principle about Eastern Rites too. As they have no diocesan bishops of their own, on this ground it may well be denied that they form a Church. An Italo-Greek may best be defined as a member of the Roman patriarchate in Italy, Sicily, or Corsica, who, as a memory of older arrangements, is still allowed to use the Byzantine Rite. With regard to the fundamental distinction of patriarchate, it must be noted that it is no longer purely geographical. A Latin in the East belongs to the Roman patriarch as much as if he lived in the West; Latin missionaries everywhere and the newer dioceses in Australia and American count as part of what was once the patriarchate of Western Europe. So also the Melkites in Leghorn, Marseilles, and Paris belong to the Byzantine Catholic patriarchate, though, as foreigners, they are temporarily subject to Latin bishops.
Nihil Obstat. May 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
and its not like they weren't aware of the patriarchates which make the basis of the sui juris claim:
Quote
It is, in the first place, a mistake (encouraged by Eastern schismatics and Anglicans) to look upon these Catholic Eastern Rites as a sort of compromise between Latin and other rites, or between Catholics and schismatics. Nor is it true that they are Catholics to whom grudging leave has been given to keep something of their national customs. Their position is quite simple and quite logical. They represent exactly the state of the Eastern Churches before the schisms. They are entirely and uncompromisingly Catholics in our strictest sense of the word, quite as much as Latins. They accept the whole Catholic Faith and the authority of the pope as visible head of the Catholic Church, as did St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom.
::)
Quote
They do not belong to the pope's patriarchate, nor do they use his rite, any more than did the great saints of Eastern Christendom. They have their own rites and their own patriarchs, as had their fathers before the schism. Nor is there any idea of compromise or concession about this. The Catholic Church has never been identified with the Western patriarchate. The pope's position as patriarch of the West is as distinct from his papal rights as is his authority as local Bishop of Rome. It is no more necessary to belong to his patriarchate in order to acknowledge his supreme jurisdiction that it is necessary to have him for diocesan bishop. The Eastern Catholic Churches in union with the West have always been as much the ideal of the Church Universal as the Latin Church. If some of those Eastern Churches fall into schism, that is a misfortune which does not affect the others who remain faithful. If all fall away, the Eastern half of the Church disappears for a time as an actual fact; it remains as a theory and an ideal to be realized again as soon as they, or some of them, come back to union with Rome.
This is what has happened. There is at any rate no certain evidence of continuity from time before the schism in any of these Eastern Catholic Churches. Through the bad time, from the various schisms to the sixteenth and seventh centuries, there are traces, isolated cases, of bishops who have at least wished for reunion with the West; but it cannot be claimed that any considerable body of Eastern Christians have kept the union throughout. The Maronites think they have, but they are mistaken; the only real case is that of the Italo-Greeks (who have never been schismatic). Really the Eastern Catholic Churches were formed by Catholic missionaries since the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. And as soon as any number of Eastern Christians were persuaded to reunite with the West, the situation that had existed before the schisms became an actual one again. They became Catholics; no one thought of asking them to become Latins. They were given bishops and patriarchs of their own as successors of the old Catholic Eastern bishops before the schism, and they became what all Eastern Christians had once been — Catholics. That the Eastern Catholics are comparatively small bodies is the unfortunate result of the fact that the majority of their countrymen prefer schism. Our missionaries would willingly make them larger ones. But, juridically, they stand exactly where all the East once stood, before the Greek schism, or during the short-lived union of Florence (1439-53). And they have as much right to exist and be respected as have Latins, or the great Catholic bishops in the East had during the first centuries. The idea of latinizing all Eastern Catholics, sometimes defended by people on our side whose zeal for uniformity is greater than their knowledge of the historical and juridical situation, is diametrically opposed to antiquity, to the Catholic system of ecclesiastical organization, and to the policy of all popes. Nor has it any hope of success. The East may become Catholic again; it will never be what it never has been — Latin.
The Romanians, of course (like all Orthodox) know better.
Quote
This completes the list of Byzantine Catholics, of whom it may be said that the chief want is organization among themselves. There has often been talk of restoring a Catholic (Melkite) Patriarch of Constantinople. It was said that Pope Leo XIII intended to arrange this before he died. If such a revival ever is made, the patriarch would have jurisdiction, or at least a primacy, over all Catholics of his Rite; in this way the scattered unities of Melkites in Syria, Ruthenians in Hungary, Italo-Greeks in Sicily, and so on, would be linked together as are all other Eastern Catholic Churches.
So much for "sui juris."
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

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #242 on: August 01, 2011, 07:30:41 PM »
There's no such thing as "Romanian rite bishops". There's a Romanian Catholic Church (it uses the Byzantine Rite).

"Churches"?  Pshaw!   That's a new-fangled piece of meaningless feel-good vocabulary crafted after Vatican II.

They've always been known as (in this case)  "Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite."

It's certainly true that they have sometimes been called that, but how far back does it go? For example, were they called that in the agreement of the Union of Brest? Or is it just something from the last couple centuries?

The Union of Brest does not speak at all of those coming into union with Rome as constituting a "Church."  It is primarily anxious that Rome will allow them to preserve their own ritual usages and not make them conform to Rome.

http://ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TREATBR.HTM

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #243 on: August 01, 2011, 07:36:43 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Many already have. Just looking out for the stragglers.

There are more than a few stragglers left.  Or you and Father Ambrose would not get so vehement and ugly... ;)

The vehemence and ugliness is coming from the lady!    I am though upset that the sacred traditions which we share with the Romanian Catholics in Italy are being trampled on and insulted by the ugly and supercilious Roman Catholics.    How dare they!  They want to impose on the Eastern Catholics the corrupt celibate priesthood even though the rotten fruits of their enforced celibacy have been exposed to our gaze for the last decades. At the end of the day it is only the Roman Catholic desires which really matter.  Pshaw to the Hill of Sorcerers (Mons Vaticanus.)
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 07:38:27 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline Schultz

  • Christian. Guitarist. Scooterist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,689
  • Scion of the McKeesport Becks.
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #244 on: August 01, 2011, 07:41:13 PM »


Before anyone gets personal, I suggest you all step back and pray for patience before you hit the post buttons again.  Otherwise, 99 day post moderation will be meted out to all parties involved in this latest urination contest.

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen

Offline Wyatt

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,465
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Latin Church
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #245 on: August 01, 2011, 07:53:08 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Many already have. Just looking out for the stragglers.

There are more than a few stragglers left.  Or you and Father Ambrose would not get so vehement and ugly... ;)

The vehemence and ugliness is coming from the lady!    I am though upset that the sacred traditions which we share with the Romanian Catholics in Italy are being trampled on and insulted by the ugly and supercilious Roman Catholics.    How dare they!  They want to impose on the Eastern Catholics the corrupt celibate priesthood even though the rotten fruits of their enforced celibacy have been exposed to our gaze for the last decades. At the end of the day it is only the Roman Catholic desires which really matter.  Pshaw to the Hill of Sorcerers (Mons Vaticanus.)
Every celibate Priest that I have met is a good and holy person. I don't know if I buy the notion that the discipline of celibacy leads to pedophilia. Clearly those men who attempted to use the priesthood to hide their sickness were sick before they became Priests. After all, I'm single Christian and, being single, I must be celibate as well, and I have never entertained the thought of abusing a child. Celibacy doesn't create pedophilia.

EDIT: I assume the rotten fruits you speak of is the Priest sex scandal, though please correct me if I am wrong.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 07:53:47 PM by Wyatt »

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #246 on: August 01, 2011, 08:05:43 PM »
To those who are saying that the Vatican has annulled the decree againt Eastern Catholic married clergy - are you aware how recent it is?

Thursday, March 03, 2011
Roman Catholic bishops veto married Eastern Rite priests in Italy

Italian news sources are reporting that the Italian Episcopal Conference
(CEI) has vetoed the idea of allowing married priests of the Romanian
Catholic Church (one of the Eastern Catholic Churches in union with the pope
of Rome) to exercise their priestly ministry in Italy.

In an article entitled "Priests of a Lesser God: CEI - New Veto to the
Presence of Married Catholic Clergy in Italy,"
Italian news service Adista
reported obtaining a copy of a confidential letter written last September 13
by Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, president of the Italian Episcopal Conference
to Lucian Muresan, Major Archbishop of the Romanian Catholic Church. In it,
Cardinal Bugnasco explained the position of the Italian Episcopal Conference
regarding not allowing the presence of married Romanian Catholic priests in
Italy. (The Romanian Catholic Church follows the Byzantine liturgical rite
and retains many customs - such as a married priesthood - similar to Eastern
Orthodoxy, from which it broke away in 1698 when it entered union with Rome.
It is estimated there are 800,000 Romanian Catholics in Italy.) Cardinal
Bagnasco, appointed by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007 to be President of the CEI,
said that the Bishops' Conference

"after having carefully examined the issue in light of the figures relating
to the consistency of the ethnic communities from Eastern European countries
and the situation of clergy in the Italian dioceses, believes that, at
present and in general, there is not 'just and reasonable cause' to justify
the granting of the dispensation."

Read the rest here
http://orthocath.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/italian-catholic-episcopal-conference-vetoes-married-priests/

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #247 on: August 01, 2011, 08:12:42 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Many already have. Just looking out for the stragglers.

There are more than a few stragglers left.  Or you and Father Ambrose would not get so vehement and ugly... ;)

The vehemence and ugliness is coming from the lady!    I am though upset that the sacred traditions which we share with the Romanian Catholics in Italy are being trampled on and insulted by the ugly and supercilious Roman Catholics.    How dare they!  They want to impose on the Eastern Catholics the corrupt celibate priesthood even though the rotten fruits of their enforced celibacy have been exposed to our gaze for the last decades. At the end of the day it is only the Roman Catholic desires which really matter.  Pshaw to the Hill of Sorcerers (Mons Vaticanus.)
Every celibate Priest that I have met is a good and holy person. I don't know if I buy the notion that the discipline of celibacy leads to pedophilia. Clearly those men who attempted to use the priesthood to hide their sickness were sick before they became Priests. After all, I'm single Christian and, being single, I must be celibate as well, and I have never entertained the thought of abusing a child. Celibacy doesn't create pedophilia.

EDIT: I assume the rotten fruits you speak of is the Priest sex scandal, though please correct me if I am wrong.
I had similar experiences as well.

In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,064
  • Excelsior
    • Archive of Our Own works
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #248 on: August 01, 2011, 08:30:35 PM »
Just to mention, it can't be said there are no celibate priests at all in Orthodoxy. As I understand it, if one is married prior to taking final vows as a priest, this is acceptable. However, once you take the vows of priesthood, if you're not married by then, you don't get married afterward. Bishops are celibate. Please correct me if this is not the case.
https://archiveofourown.org/users/Parakeetist/works Warning: stories have mature content.

"Some people only feel good when they are praising the Lord." - Coptic bishop

Mt. 21:31 Jesus said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you."

"Our Lord will *never* stop loving us." - Fr. Michael P.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #249 on: August 01, 2011, 08:31:30 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Many already have. Just looking out for the stragglers.

There are more than a few stragglers left.  Or you and Father Ambrose would not get so vehement and ugly... ;)

The vehemence and ugliness is coming from the lady!    I am though upset that the sacred traditions which we share with the Romanian Catholics in Italy are being trampled on and insulted by the ugly and supercilious Roman Catholics.    How dare they!  They want to impose on the Eastern Catholics the corrupt celibate priesthood even though the rotten fruits of their enforced celibacy have been exposed to our gaze for the last decades. At the end of the day it is only the Roman Catholic desires which really matter.  Pshaw to the Hill of Sorcerers (Mons Vaticanus.)
Every celibate Priest that I have met is a good and holy person. I don't know if I buy the notion that the discipline of celibacy leads to pedophilia. Clearly those men who attempted to use the priesthood to hide their sickness were sick before they became Priests. After all, I'm single Christian and, being single, I must be celibate as well, and I have never entertained the thought of abusing a child. Celibacy doesn't create pedophilia.

EDIT: I assume the rotten fruits you speak of is the Priest sex scandal, though please correct me if I am wrong.

No, celibacy does not create paedophilia but enforced celibacy creates various sexual problems and can lead to priests leading secret lives.   You have probably read the works of Father Andrew Greeley on the priesthood in the US?    He shows that  50% of the US priests do not maintain their vow of celibacy but enjoy both homosexual and heterosexual affairs.    It is not right that "the system" should bring the leaders of the Roman Catholic community to live such lives.  We may reproach them for failing to maintain celibacy but more than that I grieve that a burden they could never carry was placed on them.

For a lighter read you can find on the web an Italian book which provides the stories of the Italian women who function as housekeepers cum mistresses in many an Italian presbytery.  

If we had to choose between them, is it not preferable to  have the Romanian and Ukrainian married Catholic priests who do not have the stress of enforced celibacy!

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #250 on: August 01, 2011, 08:34:02 PM »
Just to mention, it can't be said there are no celibate priests at all in Orthodoxy. As I understand it, if one is married prior to taking final vows as a priest, this is acceptable. However, once you take the vows of priesthood, if you're not married by then, you don't get married afterward. Bishops are celibate. Please correct me if this is not the case.

Celibacy is a calling for monks and nuns. It is part of their special vocation.   It is not expected that God will make the same calling on parish clergy.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #251 on: August 01, 2011, 08:40:44 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Many already have. Just looking out for the stragglers.

There are more than a few stragglers left.  Or you and Father Ambrose would not get so vehement and ugly... ;)

The vehemence and ugliness is coming from the lady!    I am though upset that the sacred traditions which we share with the Romanian Catholics in Italy are being trampled on and insulted by the ugly and supercilious Roman Catholics.    How dare they!  They want to impose on the Eastern Catholics the corrupt celibate priesthood even though the rotten fruits of their enforced celibacy have been exposed to our gaze for the last decades. At the end of the day it is only the Roman Catholic desires which really matter.  Pshaw to the Hill of Sorcerers (Mons Vaticanus.)
Every celibate Priest that I have met is a good and holy person. I don't know if I buy the notion that the discipline of celibacy leads to pedophilia. Clearly those men who attempted to use the priesthood to hide their sickness were sick before they became Priests. After all, I'm single Christian and, being single, I must be celibate as well, and I have never entertained the thought of abusing a child. Celibacy doesn't create pedophilia.

EDIT: I assume the rotten fruits you speak of is the Priest sex scandal, though please correct me if I am wrong.

No, celibacy does not create paedophilia but enforced celibacy creates various sexual problems and can lead to priests leading secret lives.   You have probably read the works of Father Andrew Greeley on the priesthood in the US?    He shows that  50% of the US priests do not maintain their vow of celibacy but enjoy both homosexual and heterosexual affairs.    It is not right that "the system" should bring the leaders of the Roman Catholic community to live such lives.  We may reproach them for failing to maintain celibacy but more than that I grieve that a burden they could never carry was placed on them.

For a lighter read you can find on the web an Italian book which provides the stories of the Italian women who function as housekeepers cum mistresses in many an Italian presbytery.
 I recall a joke, current in much of the world now and in centuries past:"what is the difference between the Catholic [sic] priest and the Protestant pastor [equally well, the Orthodox [i.e. the real Catholic priest]? The Protestant pastor[/Orthodox priest] has married his girlfriend.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #252 on: August 01, 2011, 08:52:01 PM »
To those who are saying that the Vatican has annulled the decree againt Eastern Catholic married clergy - are you aware how recent it is?

Thursday, March 03, 2011
Roman Catholic bishops veto married Eastern Rite priests in Italy

Italian news sources are reporting that the Italian Episcopal Conference
(CEI) has vetoed the idea of allowing married priests of the Romanian
Catholic Church (one of the Eastern Catholic Churches in union with the pope
of Rome) to exercise their priestly ministry in Italy.

In an article entitled "Priests of a Lesser God: CEI - New Veto to the
Presence of Married Catholic Clergy in Italy,"
Italian news service Adista
reported obtaining a copy of a confidential letter written last September 13
by Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, president of the Italian Episcopal Conference
to Lucian Muresan, Major Archbishop of the Romanian Catholic Church. In it,
Cardinal Bugnasco explained the position of the Italian Episcopal Conference
regarding not allowing the presence of married Romanian Catholic priests in
Italy. (The Romanian Catholic Church follows the Byzantine liturgical rite
and retains many customs - such as a married priesthood - similar to Eastern
Orthodoxy, from which it broke away in 1698 when it entered union with Rome.
It is estimated there are 800,000 Romanian Catholics in Italy.) Cardinal
Bagnasco, appointed by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007 to be President of the CEI,
said that the Bishops' Conference

"after having carefully examined the issue in light of the figures relating
to the consistency of the ethnic communities from Eastern European countries
and the situation of clergy in the Italian dioceses, believes that, at
present and in general, there is not 'just and reasonable cause' to justify
the granting of the dispensation."

Read the rest here
http://orthocath.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/italian-catholic-episcopal-conference-vetoes-married-priests/

Quote
Sun, Oct 10 2010  
VATICAN 10-24 Oct 2010 Pope calls special session of Synod of Middle East bishops
Pope Benedict XVI called a special meeting of the Synod of Middle East Bishops to discuss relations with Islam and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the priestly celibacy issue might be unavoidable. Three Eastern Catholic patriarchs from Iraq and Lebanon have been invited for their expertise on Islamic-Christian tensions, but could be sounded out as well on priestly marriage. As it is allowed in the Eastern tradition, pro-reform Roman Catholics could see their inclusion as a hopeful sign.
http://www.newsahead.com/preview/2010/10/10/vatican-10-24-oct-2010-pope-calls-special-session-of-synod-of-middle-east-bishops/index.php

Quote
Lift probihition on married priests, synod asks Pope
Published: October 26, 2010
The Synod of Bishops for the Middle East has proposed a change to Vatican rules that technically prohibit the Eastern Catholic churches' ordination of married men outside the church's traditional homeland.
http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=23923

Quote
SYNOD-CELIBACY Oct-25-2010 (430 words) xxxi

Synod asks pope to drop restrictions on married Eastern-rite priests

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Members of the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East formally asked Pope Benedict XVI to change Vatican rules that technically prohibit the Eastern Catholic churches from ordaining married men outside the traditional homeland of their churches.

In one of 44 propositions presented to Pope Benedict Oct. 23, the synod members -- the majority of whom were Eastern Catholics -- said, "With a view to the pastoral service of our faithful, wherever they are to be found, and to respect the traditions of the Eastern churches, it would be desirable to study the possibility of having married priests outside the patriarchal territory."
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1004374.htm

Nearly a year later, have we heard anyting on this, or is it as Elijahmaria put it,
it has gone NO WHERE...and no one in the Church has even mentioned it again.   
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 08:52:39 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline Peter J

  • still a CAF poster
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,494
  • Faith: Christian
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #253 on: August 01, 2011, 08:54:09 PM »
As one who has lived in the midst of communities and families rendered by the split among the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholics I have several points from my perspective:

    a. Latin rite Catholics have never and currently do NOT understand the Eastern Catholic Churches.

    b. Latin rite Catholics will never and do NOT accept any theological or ecclesial distinctions between the Latin church and the Easterners even if the 'sui juris' Eastern Churches thoughtfully and intelligently proclaim an argument that such differences exist and are proper within their view of the 'universal' church. (see for example many writings from the Melkites and some of the essays of Cardinal Lubomir Husar.)
(emphasis added)

podkarpatska, I believe your accusations are absurd and baseless. However, I'm just going to let the readers decide for themselves (both because I'm trying to heed the mod's recent call for civility, and because I'm just plain tired of dealing with these silly generalizations) ...

"but I also have a profound respect for those who did not and remained Eastern Catholic as I understand the forces that motivated them."

Podkarpatska,
I'm trying to better understand why Eastern Catholics are reluctant to re-join the Orthodox church. Can you elaborate on these forces that motivate them to stay EC? Is it simply a matter of anti-Russian/anti-communist sentiments?

For most ECs, it wouldn't be a matter of re-joining the Orthodox Church*, but rather of joining it for the first time.


*At least not in the literal sense. I suppose you could call it "re-joining" in the sense that their ancestors were Orthodox. Not really the same thing though.

Peter is completely wrong and typifies the usual Latin understanding of the Eastern Catholics.
- Peter Jericho

Offline Peter J

  • still a CAF poster
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,494
  • Faith: Christian
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #254 on: August 01, 2011, 08:54:39 PM »
As one who has lived in the midst of communities and families rendered by the split among the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholics I have several points from my perspective:

    a. Latin rite Catholics have never and currently do NOT understand the Eastern Catholic Churches.

    b. Latin rite Catholics will never and do NOT accept any theological or ecclesial distinctions between the Latin church and the Easterners even if the 'sui juris' Eastern Churches thoughtfully and intelligently proclaim an argument that such differences exist and are proper within their view of the 'universal' church. (see for example many writings from the Melkites and some of the essays of Cardinal Lubomir Husar.)

P.S. Since elijahmaria is Byzantine Catholic, maybe there should be a special subforum where she is the only non-Orthodox allowed.  ::)
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 08:56:03 PM by Peter J »
- Peter Jericho

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #255 on: August 01, 2011, 08:57:36 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Btw, you are aware that the VAST majority of Romanians and Ukrainians confess Orthodoxy, no? In fact, that at the time that the "union of Alba Iulia" and the "union of Brest-Lvov" were mandated by the secular authorities, the vast majority of the Orthodox Faithful remained Faithful.
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

Offline Peter J

  • still a CAF poster
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,494
  • Faith: Christian
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #256 on: August 01, 2011, 09:00:33 PM »
There's no such thing as "Romanian rite bishops". There's a Romanian Catholic Church (it uses the Byzantine Rite).

"Churches"?  Pshaw!   That's a new-fangled piece of meaningless feel-good vocabulary crafted after Vatican II.

They've always been known as (in this case)  "Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite."

It's certainly true that they have sometimes been called that, but how far back does it go? For example, were they called that in the agreement of the Union of Brest? Or is it just something from the last couple centuries?

The Union of Brest does not speak at all of those coming into union with Rome as constituting a "Church."  It is primarily anxious that Rome will allow them to preserve their own ritual usages and not make them conform to Rome.

http://ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TREATBR.HTM

Alright. I guess I never really thought about it that way before.

P.S. It's been some time since I read it, and I'm not going to re-read it right now, but I do observe that the term "rite" can't be found in it.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 09:04:33 PM by Peter J »
- Peter Jericho

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #257 on: August 01, 2011, 09:52:39 PM »
There's no such thing as "Romanian rite bishops". There's a Romanian Catholic Church (it uses the Byzantine Rite).

"Churches"?  Pshaw!   That's a new-fangled piece of meaningless feel-good vocabulary crafted after Vatican II.

They've always been known as (in this case)  "Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite."

It's certainly true that they have sometimes been called that, but how far back does it go? For example, were they called that in the agreement of the Union of Brest? Or is it just something from the last couple centuries?

The Union of Brest does not speak at all of those coming into union with Rome as constituting a "Church."  It is primarily anxious that Rome will allow them to preserve their own ritual usages and not make them conform to Rome.

http://ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TREATBR.HTM

Alright. I guess I never really thought about it that way before.

P.S. It's been some time since I read it, and I'm not going to re-read it right now, but I do observe that the term "rite" can't be found in it.
It can be found here:
Quote
DECREE ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES
OF THE EASTERN RITE
ORIENTALIUM ECCLESIARUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

THE INDIVIDUAL CHURCHES OR RITES

2. The Holy Catholic Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ, is made up of the faithful who are organically united in the Holy Spirit by the same faith, the same sacraments and the same government and who, combining together into various groups which are held together by a hierarchy, form separate Churches or Rites....for it is the mind of the Catholic Church that each individual Church or Rite should retain its traditions whole and entire and likewise that it should adapt its way of life to the different needs of time and place (S. Leo IX, Litt. In terra pax, an. 1053: Ut enim; Innocentius III, Synodus Lateranensis IV, an. 1215, cap. IV: . Licet Graccos; Litt. Inter quatuor, 2 aug. 1206: Postulasti postmodum; Innocentius IV, Ep. Cum de cetero, 27 aug. 1247; Ep. Sub catholicae, 6 mart. 1254, proem.; Nicolaus III, Instructio Istud est memoriale, 9 oct. 1278; Leo X, Litt. Ap. Accepimus nuper, 18 maii 1521; Paulus III, Litt. Ap. Dudum, 23 dec. 1534; Pius IV, Const. Romanus Pontifex, 16 febr. 1564, 5; Clemens VIII, Const. Magnus Dominus, 23 dec. 1595, 10; Paulus V, Const. Solet circumspeata, 10 dec. 1615, 3; Benedictus XIV, Ep. Enc. Demandatam, 24 dec. 1743, 3; Ep. Enc. Allatae sunt, 26 iun. 1755, 3, 6-19, 32; Pius VI, Litt. Enc. Catholicae communionis, 24 maii 1787; Pius IX, Litt. In suprema, 6 ian. 1848, 3; Litt. Ap. Ecclesiam Christ;, 26 nov. 1853; Const. Romani Pontificis, 6 ian. 1862; Leo XIII, Litt. Ap. Praeclara, 20 iun. 1894, n. 7; Litt. Ap. Orientalium dignitas, 30 nov. 1894, proem.; etc. ).  3. These individual Churches, whether of the East or the West, although they differ somewhat among themselves in rite (to use the current phrase), that is, in liturgy, ecclesiastical discipline, and spiritual heritage, are, nevertheless, each as much as the others, entrusted to the pastoral government of the Roman Pontiff, the divinely appointed successor of St. Peter in primacy over the universal Church...

PRESERVATION OF THE SPIRITUAL HERITAGE OF THE EASTERN CHURCHES

6. All members of the Eastern Rite should know and be convinced that they can and should always preserve their legitimate liturgical rite and their established way of life, and that these may not be altered except to obtain for themselves an organic improvement. All these, then, must be observed by the members of the Eastern rites themselves. Besides, they should attain to on ever greater knowledge and a more exact use of them, and, if in their regard they have fallen short owing to contingencies of times and persons, they should take steps to return to their ancestral traditions.

21. Individual faithful dwelling outside the area or territory of their own rite may follow completely the established custom of the place where they live as regards the law of the sacred seasons. In families of mixed rite it is permissible to observe this law according to one and the same rite.
Four decades later, and they are still fighting for what Vatican II said they had.

It does seem that "sui juris churches" arose in the wake of VII:

Quote
4. Means should be taken therefore in every part of the world for the protection and advancement of all the individual Churches and, to this end, there should be established parishes and a special hierarchy where the spiritual good of the faithful demands it. The hierarchs of the different individual Churches with jurisdiction in one and the same territory should, by taking common counsel in regular meetings, strive to promote unity of action and with common endeavor to sustain common tasks, so as better to further the good of religion and to safeguard more effectively the ordered way of life of the clergy.

EASTERN RITE PATRIARCHS

7. The patriarchate, as an institution, has existed in the Church from the earliest times and was recognized by the first ecumenical councils.(8)

By the name Eastern patriarch, is meant the bishop to whom belongs jurisdiction over all bishops, not excepting metropolitans clergy and people of his own territory or rite, in accordance with canon law and without prejudice to the primacy of the Roman Pontiff

Wherever an hierarch of any rite is appointed outside the territorial bounds of the patriarchate, he remains attached to the hierarchy of the patriarchate of that rite, in accordance with canon law.

The patriarchs with their synods are the highest authority for all business of the patriarchate, including the right of establishing new eparchies and of nominating bishops of their rite within the territorial bounds of the patriarchate, without prejudice to the inalienable right of the Roman Pontiff to intervene in individual cases.

10. What has been said of patriarchs is valid also, in harmony with the canon law, in respect to major archbishops, who rule the whole of some individual church or rite.

11. Seeing that the patriarchal office in the Eastern Church is a traditional form of government, the Sacred Ecumenical Council ardently desires that new patriarchates should be erected where there is need, to be established either by an ecumenical council or by the Roman Pontiff.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_orientalium-ecclesiarum_en.html

Btw, this was issued at a time when there was a Latin Patriarchate in EACH and EVERY one of the Pentarchy. Or, rather, claimed: they were titular bishops in Rome.  Of course.
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

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #258 on: August 01, 2011, 10:29:12 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Btw, you are aware that the VAST majority of Romanians and Ukrainians confess Orthodoxy, no? In fact, that at the time that the "union of Alba Iulia" and the "union of Brest-Lvov" were mandated by the secular authorities, the vast majority of the Orthodox Faithful remained Faithful.

Define "vast majority"... ;)

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #259 on: August 01, 2011, 10:30:45 PM »
As one who has lived in the midst of communities and families rendered by the split among the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholics I have several points from my perspective:

    a. Latin rite Catholics have never and currently do NOT understand the Eastern Catholic Churches.

    b. Latin rite Catholics will never and do NOT accept any theological or ecclesial distinctions between the Latin church and the Easterners even if the 'sui juris' Eastern Churches thoughtfully and intelligently proclaim an argument that such differences exist and are proper within their view of the 'universal' church. (see for example many writings from the Melkites and some of the essays of Cardinal Lubomir Husar.)

P.S. Since elijahmaria is Byzantine Catholic, maybe there should be a special subforum where she is the only non-Orthodox allowed.  ::)

Hey...I don't say mean things about you!!.... :laugh:

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #260 on: August 01, 2011, 10:33:02 PM »
Good night and God bless all of you who are participating here. 

They are rough seas that we navigate:  I only know one absolutely reliable solution for rough seas.

Communion!!

 :angel:

M.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #261 on: August 01, 2011, 10:46:02 PM »
It seems that "sui juris churches" only came into existence with the promulgation of the Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium (CCEO), i.e. in 1990.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_19901018_sacri-canones_lt.html

http://canonlaw.wikispot.org/CCEO

of which, canon 42-54 show that there is no such thing as a "sui juris church" under the Vatican:
Quote
TITLE 3

The Supreme Authority of the Church

Canon 42

Just as, by the Lord's decision, Saint Peter and the other Apostles constitute one college, so in a similar way the Roman Pontiff, successor of Peter, and the bishops, successors of the

Apostles, are joined together.
 


Canon 43

The bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom resides the office

(munus) given in special way by the Lord to Peter, first of the

Apostles and to be transmitted to his successors, is head of the

college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the entire

Church on earth; therefore, in virtue of his office (munus) he

enjoys supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in

the Church which he can always freely exercise.
 
Canon 44

1. The Roman Pontiff obtains full and supreme power in the

Church by means of legitimate election accepted by him together

with episcopal consecration; therefore, one who is already a

bishop obtains this same power from the moment he accepts his

election to the pontificate, but if the one elected lacks the

episcopal character, he is to be ordained a bishop immediately.

2. If it should happen that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office (munus), it is required for validity that he makes the resignation freely and that it be duly manifested, but not that it

be accepted by anyone

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

1. In exercising his office (munus) the Roman Pontiff is assisted by the bishops who aid him in various ways and among these

is the synod of bishops; moreover the cardinals, the Roman curia,

pontifical legates and other persons and various institutes assist him according to the needs of the times; all these persons

and institutes carry out the task committed to them in his name

and by his authority for the good of all the Churches, according

to the norm of law established by the Roman Pontiff himself. 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 48

In this Code the term "Apostolic See" or "Holy See" applies not

only to the Roman Pontiff but also, unless it is otherwise prescribed by the law or the nature of the matter indicates otherwise, dicasteries and other institutes of the Roman curia.

Canon 49

The college of bishops, whose head is the Roman Pontiff and whose

members are the bishops by virtue of sacramental ordination and

hierarchical communion with the head and members of the college,

and in which the apostolic body continually endures, together

with its head, and never without its head, is also the subject of

supreme and full power over the universal Church.
 
Canon 50

1. The college of bishops exercises power over the entire

Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council. 2. The

college exercises the same power through the united action of the

bishops dispersed in the world, which action as such has been

initiated or has been freely accepted by the Roman Pontiff so

that a truly collegial act results. 3. It is for the Roman

Pontiff, in keeping with the needs of the Church, to select and

promote the ways by which the college of bishops is to exercise

collegially its function regarding the entire Church.
 
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 52

1. It is the right and obligation of all and only the bishops

who are members of the college of bishops to participate in an

ecumenical council with a deliberative vote. 2. The supreme

authority of the Church can also call others who are not bishops

to an ecumenical council and determine what part they take in it.
 
Canon 53

If the Apostolic See becomes vacant during the celebration of a

council, it is interrupted by the law itself until a new Roman

Pontiff orders it to be continued or dissolves it.
 
Canon 54

1. Decrees of an ecumenical council do not have obligatory

force unless they are approved by the Roman Pontiff together with

the fathers of the council and are confirmed by the Roman Pontiff

and promulgated at his order. 2. When the college of bishops

takes collegial action in another manner, initiated or freely

accepted by the Roman Pontiff, in order for its decrees to have

binding force, they need this same confirmation and promulgation.
 
http://www.intratext.com/X/ENG1199.HTM

Nothing says that as elouquently as the fact that the CCEO was promulgated in Latin, the official version.

On that, the canons of the real code of canon law on ordinaries leaves the Romanian "Catholics" without much recourse in Italy, despite what EM says.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #262 on: August 01, 2011, 10:54:29 PM »
I figure when the Romanians and Ukranians are ready to join Orthodoxy, they will let y'all know.
Btw, you are aware that the VAST majority of Romanians and Ukrainians confess Orthodoxy, no? In fact, that at the time that the "union of Alba Iulia" and the "union of Brest-Lvov" were mandated by the secular authorities, the vast majority of the Orthodox Faithful remained Faithful.

Define "vast majority"... ;)
When you get around the 3/4 mark, you're approaching the vast majority.  In present day Romania 86.8% (Moldova, 98%) in Ukraine 83.7%.  Vast enough for you?
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 10:56:00 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #263 on: August 01, 2011, 10:57:32 PM »
Good night and God bless all of you who are participating here. 

They are rough seas that we navigate:  I only know one absolutely reliable solution for rough seas.

Communion!!
with the Captain of the Ark of Salvation, not with Davy Jones.
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

Offline stanley123

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,814
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #264 on: August 01, 2011, 11:04:44 PM »
There's no such thing as "Romanian rite bishops". There's a Romanian Catholic Church (it uses the Byzantine Rite).

"Churches"?  Pshaw!   That's a new-fangled piece of meaningless feel-good vocabulary crafted after Vatican II.

They've always been known as (in this case)  "Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite."

It's certainly true that they have sometimes been called that, but how far back does it go? For example, were they called that in the agreement of the Union of Brest? Or is it just something from the last couple centuries?

The Union of Brest does not speak at all of those coming into union with Rome as constituting a "Church."  It is primarily anxious that Rome will allow them to preserve their own ritual usages and not make them conform to Rome.

http://ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/TREATBR.HTM

Alright. I guess I never really thought about it that way before.

P.S. It's been some time since I read it, and I'm not going to re-read it right now, but I do observe that the term "rite" can't be found in it.
It can be found here:
Quote
DECREE ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES
OF THE EASTERN RITE
ORIENTALIUM ECCLESIARUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

THE INDIVIDUAL CHURCHES OR RITES

2. The Holy Catholic Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ, is made up of the faithful who are organically united in the Holy Spirit by the same faith, the same sacraments and the same government and who, combining together into various groups which are held together by a hierarchy, form separate Churches or Rites....for it is the mind of the Catholic Church that each individual Church or Rite should retain its traditions whole and entire and likewise that it should adapt its way of life to the different needs of time and place (S. Leo IX, Litt. In terra pax, an. 1053: Ut enim; Innocentius III, Synodus Lateranensis IV, an. 1215, cap. IV: . Licet Graccos; Litt. Inter quatuor, 2 aug. 1206: Postulasti postmodum; Innocentius IV, Ep. Cum de cetero, 27 aug. 1247; Ep. Sub catholicae, 6 mart. 1254, proem.; Nicolaus III, Instructio Istud est memoriale, 9 oct. 1278; Leo X, Litt. Ap. Accepimus nuper, 18 maii 1521; Paulus III, Litt. Ap. Dudum, 23 dec. 1534; Pius IV, Const. Romanus Pontifex, 16 febr. 1564, 5; Clemens VIII, Const. Magnus Dominus, 23 dec. 1595, 10; Paulus V, Const. Solet circumspeata, 10 dec. 1615, 3; Benedictus XIV, Ep. Enc. Demandatam, 24 dec. 1743, 3; Ep. Enc. Allatae sunt, 26 iun. 1755, 3, 6-19, 32; Pius VI, Litt. Enc. Catholicae communionis, 24 maii 1787; Pius IX, Litt. In suprema, 6 ian. 1848, 3; Litt. Ap. Ecclesiam Christ;, 26 nov. 1853; Const. Romani Pontificis, 6 ian. 1862; Leo XIII, Litt. Ap. Praeclara, 20 iun. 1894, n. 7; Litt. Ap. Orientalium dignitas, 30 nov. 1894, proem.; etc. ).  3. These individual Churches, whether of the East or the West, although they differ somewhat among themselves in rite (to use the current phrase), that is, in liturgy, ecclesiastical discipline, and spiritual heritage, are, nevertheless, each as much as the others, entrusted to the pastoral government of the Roman Pontiff, the divinely appointed successor of St. Peter in primacy over the universal Church...

PRESERVATION OF THE SPIRITUAL HERITAGE OF THE EASTERN CHURCHES

6. All members of the Eastern Rite should know and be convinced that they can and should always preserve their legitimate liturgical rite and their established way of life, and that these may not be altered except to obtain for themselves an organic improvement. All these, then, must be observed by the members of the Eastern rites themselves. Besides, they should attain to on ever greater knowledge and a more exact use of them, and, if in their regard they have fallen short owing to contingencies of times and persons, they should take steps to return to their ancestral traditions.

21. Individual faithful dwelling outside the area or territory of their own rite may follow completely the established custom of the place where they live as regards the law of the sacred seasons. In families of mixed rite it is permissible to observe this law according to one and the same rite.
Four decades later, and they are still fighting for what Vatican II said they had.

It does seem that "sui juris churches" arose in the wake of VII:

Quote
4. Means should be taken therefore in every part of the world for the protection and advancement of all the individual Churches and, to this end, there should be established parishes and a special hierarchy where the spiritual good of the faithful demands it. The hierarchs of the different individual Churches with jurisdiction in one and the same territory should, by taking common counsel in regular meetings, strive to promote unity of action and with common endeavor to sustain common tasks, so as better to further the good of religion and to safeguard more effectively the ordered way of life of the clergy.

EASTERN RITE PATRIARCHS

7. The patriarchate, as an institution, has existed in the Church from the earliest times and was recognized by the first ecumenical councils.(8)

By the name Eastern patriarch, is meant the bishop to whom belongs jurisdiction over all bishops, not excepting metropolitans clergy and people of his own territory or rite, in accordance with canon law and without prejudice to the primacy of the Roman Pontiff

Wherever an hierarch of any rite is appointed outside the territorial bounds of the patriarchate, he remains attached to the hierarchy of the patriarchate of that rite, in accordance with canon law.

The patriarchs with their synods are the highest authority for all business of the patriarchate, including the right of establishing new eparchies and of nominating bishops of their rite within the territorial bounds of the patriarchate, without prejudice to the inalienable right of the Roman Pontiff to intervene in individual cases.

10. What has been said of patriarchs is valid also, in harmony with the canon law, in respect to major archbishops, who rule the whole of some individual church or rite.

11. Seeing that the patriarchal office in the Eastern Church is a traditional form of government, the Sacred Ecumenical Council ardently desires that new patriarchates should be erected where there is need, to be established either by an ecumenical council or by the Roman Pontiff.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_orientalium-ecclesiarum_en.html

Btw, this was issued at a time when there was a Latin Patriarchate in EACH and EVERY one of the Pentarchy. Or, rather, claimed: they were titular bishops in Rome.  Of course.
"All members of the Eastern Rite should know and be convinced that they can and should always preserve their legitimate liturgical rite and their established way of life, and that these may not be altered except to obtain for themselves an organic improvement."
This seems like it would rule out any interference by the Western Church in the established way of celibacy for the Eastern Catholic priests of Romania?

Offline Peter J

  • still a CAF poster
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,494
  • Faith: Christian
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #265 on: August 01, 2011, 11:07:35 PM »
"All members of the Eastern Rite should know and be convinced that they can and should always preserve their legitimate liturgical rite and their established way of life, and that these may not be altered except to obtain for themselves an organic improvement."

Hear hear!
- Peter Jericho

Offline Peter J

  • still a CAF poster
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,494
  • Faith: Christian
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #266 on: August 01, 2011, 11:08:52 PM »
It seems that "sui juris churches" only came into existence with the promulgation of the Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium (CCEO), i.e. in 1990.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_19901018_sacri-canones_lt.html

http://canonlaw.wikispot.org/CCEO

of which, canon 42-54 show that there is no such thing as a "sui juris church" under the Vatican:

So ... are you deliberately contradicting yourself, or what exactly?
- Peter Jericho

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #267 on: August 01, 2011, 11:10:22 PM »
"All members of the Eastern Rite should know and be convinced that they can and should always preserve their legitimate liturgical rite and their established way of life, and that these may not be altered except to obtain for themselves an organic improvement."
This seems like it would rule out any interference by the Western Church in the established way of celibacy for the Eastern Catholic priests of Romania?
You would think so.  But that depends on the sincerity of the declaration.

40+ years later, I think the jury has come back on that.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2011, 11:10:48 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #268 on: August 01, 2011, 11:11:22 PM »
It seems that "sui juris churches" only came into existence with the promulgation of the Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium (CCEO), i.e. in 1990.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_19901018_sacri-canones_lt.html

http://canonlaw.wikispot.org/CCEO

of which, canon 42-54 show that there is no such thing as a "sui juris church" under the Vatican:

So ... are you deliberately contradicting yourself, or what exactly?
you addressing the Vatican?
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: Eastern Catholics
« Reply #269 on: August 01, 2011, 11:13:10 PM »
"All members of the Eastern Rite should know and be convinced that they can and should always preserve their legitimate liturgical rite and their established way of life, and that these may not be altered except to obtain for themselves an organic improvement."

Hear hear!
they didn't hear that back in Italy.  Odd, since it was said in the Vatican. Might be the sincerity disconnect.
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