Papal Authority And The Betrayal Of Poland

[PhuturePriest]

that would be horrible...

 

Don't make me call 9-1-1 on you.

[Guest]

lol

[Apotheoun]

I see you are an Eastern Catholic. What are the limits of obedience in your sphere of thought?

I accept the primacy of the Bishop of Rome within the Church as it was formulated and was lived in the first millennium, and as a consequence I reject any theory that turns primacy into supremacy.

[Apteka]

I accept the primacy of the Bishop of Rome within the Church as it was formulated and was lived in the first millennium, and as a consequence I reject any theory that turns primacy into supremacy.

 

I understand but what are the limits to obedience in the Eastern tradition (if any)? Must an Eastern Orthodox lay person submit to their immediate superior (metropolitan, bishop, etc) in all matters with the exception of those that contradict the faith and are outside of the Bishop's jurisdiction?

Edited July 31, 2013 by Apteka

[Apotheoun]

I understand but what are the limits to obedience in the Eastern tradition (if any)? Must an Eastern Orthodox lay person submit to their immediate superior (metropolitan, bishop, etc) in all matters with the exception of those that contradict the faith and are outside of the Bishop's jurisdiction?

Absolute obedience is given only to God, while a form of relative obedience can be given to Church authorities. But should the hierarch teach heresy (e.g., Nestorius, Apollinaris, Dioscorus, Pyrrhus, et al.) one owes no obedience to him, because obedience is always obedience in the truth.

[Apteka]

Absolute obedience is given only to God, while a form of relative obedience can be given to Church authorities. But should the hierarch teach heresy (e.g., Nestorius, Apollinaris, Dioscorus, Pyrrhus, et al.) one owes no obedience to him, because obedience is always obedience in the truth.

 

If in the above case it were an Orthodox Metropolitan ordering the Orthodox faithful to not revolt, would relative obedience be owed and they would have to give up their fight for freedom?

[Apotheoun]

If in the above case it were an Orthodox Metropolitan ordering the Orthodox faithful to not revolt, would relative obedience be owed and they would have to give up their fight for freedom?

I don't think that the Orthodox Tradition would support the notion that a bishop can prevent people from seeking freedom from oppression. But hey, an Orthodox bishop also couldn't just change the liturgy with the stroke of a pen. Orthodox bishops are not the source of Tradition in Eastern Orthodoxy; instead, they are merely its servants.

[MithLuin]

I'm glad most of you agree that the Pope was in error here, but where did he err? In the Encyclical, Pope Gregory states that it is the constant teaching of the Church to be obedient to legitimate authority. Did the Pope err in stating revolt is never justified, and that the people must always be obedient to authority? Or did he err in suggesting that the Russians were the legitimate authority over the Poles?

 

The latter.  Legitimate authority (if it is truly legitimate) is not something we should lightly rebel against.  But since when would the Russians be considered the legitimate authority over Poland?  I think this is a case of the pope allowing politics to cloud his judgement.  Not unusual amongst world leaders, unfortunately.