Author Topic: Should there be separate Bishops for different liturgical rites?  (Read 127 times)

Offline TheReturnofLive

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 321
  • Thanked: 88 times
  • Saint John Chrysostom, pray for me, a sinner!
  • Religion: Eastern Orthodox inquirer
This might sound incredibly controversial to propose, but is it really wise that there are separate Bishops and Patriarchates for different liturgical rites within the same area?

It's obviously the case that there is more than one Bishop or Patriarch in the same area in the same location to try to prevent the integrity of different liturgical rites from being destroyed by Latin Bishops who, being completely ignorant of the traditions of the different rite, may try to "Latinize" or destroy the integrity of these rites.

However....

In my honest opinion, I think that the consequences are that these communities are left in complete isolation from one another, with the communities ignorant of each other, which I think is not only dangerous for the end goal of the integrity of the rite itself (for some Pope could come along and just destroy the integrity rather ignorantly), but dangerous for the existence of these rites, which stay stagnant while the Roman rite continues to grow. The fact that Pope Pius X lowered the age of first communion and Catholics were "scandalized" by this fact is really a testament to how badly ignorant Catholics were (and still are) of the Eastern Rite in the first place

The rites themselves tend to not evangelize, just staying comfortable within their own ethnic clique, which only makes the "Western Lung" far more lump-sided than the Eastern Lung, as the Eastern Lung is already 5% of the total Catholic population. It also increases Ethnophyletism, such that the nation becomes identical with the Rite, and the Rite with the nation, which is INCREDIBLY dangerous for a promotion of racism, ethno-supremacy, etc.

Personally, I think a better solution is to allow the sizes of Roman Catholic dioceses to be reduced, and to give an amount of territory of those dioceses where Eastern Rite Bishops and Patriarchs exist to Eastern Rite Bishops and Patriarchs, while allowing each liturgical rite to exist independently without any interference from the Bishops in question, such that you can have a Latin Bishop with a Melkite Church, but have a Melkite Bishop with a Latin Church. Obviously, there would be far more Latin Bishops and Cardinals owning Eastern-Rite Churches than the other way around, but the Rites wouldn't be left ethnically isolated and people could appreciate other cultural traditions.

This is closer to how the Ancient Church did it - Ravenna in Italy was owned by Constantinople, but the Roman Churches were allowed to exist in Ravenna, and Helsinki was owned by Rome, but Byzantine Rite Churches were allowed to exist within Helsinki.

This is also following what the Apostolic Canons, which say 1 bishop per territory.

This might sound weird, but what do you guys think?
« Last Edit: January 04, 2019, 02:43:05 PM by TheReturnofLive »
 

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6395
  • Thanked: 4064 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Should there be separate Bishops for different liturgical rites?
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2019, 02:33:04 PM »
Any suggestion that would work to keep these ancient and venerable rites viable, would be great. Unfortunately my experience with the Eastern rite Catholics, is that their rites become so intertwined with their nationalism, that they really don't want any non (   ) fill in the blank nationals, coming to their services; the only exception that I have found is with the Melkites, who are about the most nicest, most hospitable people I have encountered. 
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers
 

Offline TheReturnofLive

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 321
  • Thanked: 88 times
  • Saint John Chrysostom, pray for me, a sinner!
  • Religion: Eastern Orthodox inquirer
Re: Should there be separate Bishops for different liturgical rites?
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2019, 02:34:13 PM »
Any suggestion that would work to keep these ancient and venerable rites viable, would be great. Unfortunately my experience with the Eastern rite Catholics, is that their rites become so intertwined with their nationalism, that they really don't want any non (   ) fill in the blank nationals, coming to their services; the only exception that I have found is with the Melkites, who are about the most nicest, most hospitable people I have encountered.

This is a problem I see with having separate bishops and patriarchs per rite within the same area, you create ethnic isolationism.

Any change would have to be a top-down change, of course, with the Pope re-organizing it.

Noticeably, the Russian Greek Catholic Church doesn't seem to have this problem of ethnocentrism, precisely because they exist under Latin and Ruthenian Bishops

« Last Edit: January 04, 2019, 02:38:17 PM by TheReturnofLive »