Whither papal respect for Eastern Patriarchs?

(CNS) - The Vatican has overturned a ruling by Chaldean Catholic Patriarch Louis Raphael I Sako, lifting the suspension of Chaldean priests who fled Iraq after the Islamic State came to power.

The Chaldean Patriarch had ordered all of his priests to return to their parishes, unless they had received explicit permission to leave. He reasoned that priests should serve their people even when their ministry puts them in danger.

Chaldean Catholics in San Diego, California, appealed to the Vatican, and won a ruling in favor of Father Noel Gorgis, who is now serving in a parish there. The ruling allowed Father Gorgis to remain in California and continue his priestly ministry.

The same ruling applies to other Chaldean priests who faced suspension because of the Patriarch’s order.

Comments

  1. Samuel J. HowardJanuary 15, 2015 at 4:37 PM

    "lifting the suspension of Chaldean priests who fled Iraq after the Islamic State came to power."

    This part seems to be innacurate. From reading the other articles, it appears that these priests, certainly Fr. Gorgis, left Iraq around the time of the *1st* Gulf War i.e. circa 1990. So at least some of them have been in the US for about 20 years and now they're getting around to disciplining them, because of the current situation of priests leaving their posts.

    (Which is not to say neccesarily that this is either a) the right decision or b) the right way for authority to be exercised.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownJanuary 15, 2015 at 11:19 PM

    The priests appealed to Rome. This is not disrespecting the Eastern Patriarchs. There is a long history of Eastern Bishops and Priest appealing to the Pope of Rome during times of trial.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brantley HobbsJanuary 16, 2015 at 7:55 AM

    Nelson,

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but while there are plenty of instances throughout history of bishops appealing to Rome, I can't think of a single one where a priest appealed. Where the Pope exercised such authority, it came in a synodal manner (i.e., the result of a synod asking for the Pope's judgement).

    Having a single priest appeal to the Pope, and then having said Pope make a pronouncement countermanding that priest's hierarch not only is without (conciliarily approved) precedent, it is canonically improper.

    The Pope, like any other bishop, has immediate authority only in his own diocese, or at least he should have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UnknownJanuary 16, 2015 at 11:06 AM

      Perhaps you are right about individual priest appealing to Rome but the local Chaldean Catholic Bishops also appealed to Rome, I believe, on these priests behalf.

      Delete
  4. Samuel J. HowardJanuary 16, 2015 at 11:31 AM

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but while there are plenty of instances throughout history of bishops appealing to Rome, I can't think of a single one where a priest appealed.

    Arguably, Pope Nicholas I and Pope Adrian II hearing and supporting the Priest Constantine and the Hierodeacon Methodious in their appeal against Theotmar, Archbishop of Salzburg and Bishop of Passau who asserted authority over the territory in which they were working.

    The brothers had been sent to Great Moravia by Patriarch Photius, but there was a legitimate dispute at that point about whose territory they were in.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Response to “On administering Holy Communion in a Time of a Plague”

This was sent to me and deserves a read. You can read the Calivas article here . We can all agree that we are living in unusual times. However, the nature and extent of the illness that we face, and the proper response of the Church, is a matter of much disagreement. We have seen various responses to the COVID-19 epidemic: calls to close our Churches as infectious vectors, and demands to open them as places of spiritual healing. Directives a) ordering the cessation of sacramental life as part of an effort to “flatten the curve,” and cries for access to the divine grace that flows forth from those very mysteries; b) calling for the restriction of “at-risk persons,” and serious questions about the validity of such controls, c) instructions to liturgists to wear personal protective equipment during the celebration of the divine services and the distribution of the holy Mysteries, and uncertainty about the fitness of such practices. Who has been championing what and on behalf of whom? The ...
Read more

Sr. Vassa: There's no ontological impediment to priestesses

Image
Is the male-only priesthood a discipline or essential to the nature of being a priest? Sr. Vassa (again unflinchingly taking up a contentious topic by climbing up the ladder to the highest platform and then jumping into the deep end head first) dives right in and says there is no reason beyond personal preference to not have female clergy. You know, when people ask me about women in priesthood, they say, 'Sister, why can't women be priests?' And I say, 'Women CAN be priests. We don't WANT them to be priests.' Because you see, God can do anything, and the Church, by divine authority, uh, can do anything, but, the Church doesn't want to - and that's a legitimate reason. What I don't like is when we TRY to pretend that there are other reasons for this, because it's legitimate not to want something, and there are reasons not to want this - right? - but, we shouldn't pretent that there's some... reason, that, for example, the maleness...
Read more