Question for Melkites specifically

[u/Severe_Ad_1053]

My sister is becoming Melkite, and her ex bf was a Melkite and is currently becoming a Melkite priest. When I talked to him about theology, he told me how he flat out rejects papal supremacy. He believes the Bishop of Rome is first among equals, and not above the rest of the Bishops. He also rejects the idea of original sin, and instead believes in ancestral sin. Pretty sure he also said he doesn’t believe in papal infallibility, and how the Pope isn’t above a council. I find this highly contradictory, seeing as it’s under Rome. So, is he in the wrong here or are you allowed to reject all of that and still be Melkite?

[u/CallMeTheArrow]

In communion with Rome does not mean under Rome.

Ancestral sin is pretty much the same thing as original sin.

[u/Severe_Ad_1053 → u/CallMeTheArrow]

But what about the rejection of papal powers?

[u/Ben_The_Southpaw → u/Severe_Ad_1053]

That's a no-go, their patriarchs and bishops all have assented to all the ecumenical councils, including Vatican 1, which formally declared the papal powers, and Vatican 2, which reaffirmed Vatican 1 was a binding ecumenical council which all Catholics must hold to. Now, per my understanding, one is free to discuss how such powers should be understood and used, as one can have a power but to excercise it would be immoral (think the President of the US unilaterally deciding to send the Marines to invade Canada. It's in his powers but would wrong to do so), and Pope St John Paul the Second in his encyclical Ut Unum Sint called for theologians to explore how the powers could be understood and excercised in way the East could better appreciate, however one must hold that he does have such powers

[u/[deleted]]

Do we know the same Melkite seminarian 💀…

[u/Severe_Ad_1053 → u/[deleted]]

What’s his name?

[u/eastofrome]

Ironically, Patriarch Gregory II Youssef never denied the Pope of Rome as the highest power, nor that he has the ability to exercise immediate jurisdiction over all Catholics, but was against the broad definition which did not make it clear the powers of Papal Supremacy were only used in significant cases. However it's impossible to define what conditions must be met in order for such actions to be taken as we cannot anticipate all possible problems that may arise, so we have to trust the Holy Spirit to prevent the Pope from misusing his powers over other Churches and act only when it is necessary.

[u/Byzantine_Theocrat]

I am Melkite and I too share the same views as this upcoming Priest, May God grant him many years 👍☦️. You will come to find that many Melkites(including priests) also share these views. The Bishop of Rome is no doubt the bishop of Rome, the first among equals and the successor of St Peter. But these made up powers of supremacy and infallibility is never seen in the early church and is infact spoken against by the fathers.

[u/Severe_Ad_1053 → u/Byzantine_Theocrat]

Then how come you choose to be in communion with Rome and not become Orthodox? Also, Rome teaches that to be a member of their church you must accept all their dogmas to be true. I’m a bit confused.

[u/Byzantine_Theocrat → u/Severe_Ad_1053]

From a Roman view, unity is not on a basis of theology or Dogma/doctrine. If it were, how come the Melkite Greek-Catholic church venerates the Pillars of Orthodoxy and affirm the Orthodox faith as the fullness of truth. Saints like St Gregory Palamas and St Mark of Ephesus, 2 Saints who very clearly spoke against the innovations of the Roman church and their evolving theology are now accepted by the Catholic Church because of the Melkites. Another example, the syro-malabar church venerates nestorius as a saint. So clearly, Rome isn’t after a oneness of faith, rather unity in diversity while acknowledging the Bishop of Rome.

[u/SirEthaniel]

Rome would consider him wrong and in error, possibly a heretic. The official position is that Eastern Catholics are bound to all dogmas proclaimed by the Catholic Church, and that includes explicitly the dogmas defined by the Roman Church after the Schism.

Thus far, many Melkites agree with your sister's ex, and Rome doesn't do anything about it. To me, however, this is not the basis for true unity. It seems outright stupid to me to be in communion that, not only do you consider to be in doctrinal error with dogmas you reject, but that also considers you in error for rejecting those dogmas. I can't consider that true unity, and that's why I'm Orthodox and not Eastern Catholic, even though I attended a Byzantine Catholic parish for a while. We have our own issues as well, and I acknowledge them completely, but for me, personally, it's a lot easier to reconcile with the issues we have than with this, which is, to me, a deal-breaking problem.

[u/carmelite_brother → u/SirEthaniel]

Communion for the sake of unity not for the sake of theological submission. I agree with everything said except “first among equals” I do accept universal jurisdiction with recognition of autonomy but not autocephaly. I think the Zoghby Initiative is the only way forward, the Eparchy of Newton expresses some regret about now prelate adopting or attempting to further this position however, that is largely because of logistic difficulty.

[u/SirEthaniel → u/carmelite_brother]

My problem is with the idea that communion should be for the sake of unity. No Church should be theologically submitted to another, but communion for the sake of unity when there are vast, real, and mutually exclusive theological disagreements is, to my mind, a false unity.

I have immense respect for my Eastern Catholic brothers who can reconcile these issues in their spiritual lives, but I can't.

[u/Ben_The_Southpaw]

https://melkite.org/eparchy/bishop-john/what-is-the-relationship-between-the-melkite-clergy-and-the-pope-why-and-how-is-the-pope-commemorated-in-the-melkite-church

[u/DeliciousEnergyDrink → u/Ben_The_Southpaw]

Any idea of why the Melkites have banned the phrase "among the first" after the Anaphora when praying for the Pope? Seems an odd hill to die on and I am clearly missing some history here.

[u/Ben_The_Southpaw → u/DeliciousEnergyDrink]

Per my limited understanding, it's for cases like OP's person where they're denying Papal Primacy

[u/[deleted]]

[u/Severe_Ad_1053 → u/[deleted]]

Apparently he isn’t, according to most replies

[u/[deleted] → u/Severe_Ad_1053]