Bp Fellay says total VII acceptance no longer a prerequisite! - Page 4

ByzCathCantor · #46 Jun 20, '12, 12:35 pm

To ByzCath's point, we must agree on what is meant by collegiality.

This definition (from Wikipedia) is consistent with my understanding of the term and concept:

Quote:

Collegiality is the relationship between colleagues.

Colleagues are those explicitly united in a common purpose and respecting each other's abilities to work toward that purpose. A colleague is an associate in a profession or in a civil or ecclesiastical office.

IMHO, it is that notion of "working toward a common purpose" that is most essential.

TrueLight · #47 Jun 20, '12, 6:56 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ByzCathCantor

My first thought was a reflection on the Catholic Church alone.

Simply speaking, within the Catholic Communion, I see a need for our bishops to be more united in many matters. It is still difficult for me to understand how there can be such disparity of viewpoint between bishops of the same Church (e.g. liturgical practices and norms). Collegiality should allow for varying points of view (and still be respectful of the independent authority of each ordinary), yet always gravitate the group toward a consensus that is consistent and representative of the best traditions and values of the Church.

The funny thing is I see collegiality as why Bishops feel they can do what they want or even downright speak publicly against Catholic teaching or go against the will of the Pope.

Then again, I do not know how Bishops acted in the 1700's for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hesychios

The modern Latin Catholic concept assumes that this is a zero-sum game, that the increase of one necessarily suggests the reduction of the other. It has to be thought of that way because the Latin church as defined papal jurisdiction as an absolute.

I'm not so sure the Latin Church sees things this way anymore.

Mrs Sally · #48 Jun 20, '12, 7:15 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueLight

Then again, I do not know how Bishops acted in the 1700's for example.

I don't have any specific examples in mind, but just thinking about ordinary historic realities, I would guess that bishops were more autonomous in the past.

Travel and communications were so much more difficult, that when specific questions arose in a diocese, the bishop would have had to answer them without necessarily referencing any other bishop, or even Rome. So a bishop may have interpreted or implemented Document X in a much different way than another bishop and it wouldn't necessarily been noticed or resolved for quite some time.

That's not to say the bishops in the 1700s were any different than bishops today - trying to follow God's will for their church in the best way they can with the understanding they have.

TrueLight · #49 Jun 20, '12, 7:17 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs Sally

I don't have any specific examples in mind, but just thinking about ordinary historic realities, I would guess that bishops were more autonomous in the past.

Travel and communications were so much more difficult, that when specific questions arose in a diocese, the bishop would have had to answer them without necessarily referencing any other bishop, or even Rome. So a bishop may have interpreted or implemented Document X in a much different way than another bishop and it wouldn't necessarily been noticed or resolved for quite some time.

That's not to say the bishops in the 1700s were any different than bishops today - trying to follow God's will for their church in the best way they can with the understanding they have.

Interesting point!

We have Youtube and laity can easily videotape and post all sort of stuff.

diane taylor · #50 Jun 20, '12, 7:37 pm

Bp Fellay of course is a respected member of holy Mother Church therefore what he says must surely be respected. All of us, with true comprehension of the Extraordinary Form need to be patient, in the knowledge that our Holy Father is steering the bark of Peter!: God bless all who care.thumbsup:

clem456 · #51 Jun 26, '12, 3:39 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimothyH

I see neither conflict nor mutual exclusion.

The Pope's power is supreme, and the Order of Bishops, together with the Pope have supreme and full authority over the universal church.

I don't see what the issue is. It makes perfect sense to me.

-Tim-

Tim, cmon. You have to -look- for the issues.You are approaching it from the wrong angle dude.

Elizium23 · #52 Jun 27, '12, 2:30 am

The developments this week have been interesting, to say the least. There is a good article with words from Di Noia here.

TrueLight · #53 Jun 27, '12, 6:51 am

I think everyone is now afraid of this thread.

TimothyH · #54 Jun 27, '12, 6:53 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by clem456

Tim, cmon. You have to -look- for the issues.You are approaching it from the wrong angle dude.

When there is no conflict, argument, dissention, factions, splits or loss of peace, then it is obviously being approached from the wrong angle.

I'll try to do better.

You stink!

How's that?

-Tim-

LoyalViews · #55 Jun 27, '12, 8:16 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueLight

I think everyone is now afraid of this thread.

I am.

(hides in the corner)

TrueLight · #56 Jun 27, '12, 8:40 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoyalViews

I am.

(hides in the corner)

Ha ha!

dmartin11 · #57 Jun 28, '12, 8:24 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimothyH

When there is no conflict, argument, dissention, factions, splits or loss of peace, then it is obviously being approached from the wrong angle.

I'll try to do better.

You stink!

How's that?

-Tim-

dmartin11 · #58 Jun 28, '12, 8:27 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimothyH

When there is no conflict, argument, dissention, factions, splits or loss of peace, then it is obviously being approached from the wrong angle.

I'll try to do better.

You stink!

How's that?

-Tim-

no need for issues, no need for "critical thinking" - which is a euphemism for tearing down and destroying all tradition and values. the Church is not a democracy.

Jane of Arc · #59 Jun 29, '12, 6:27 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueLight

The funny thing is I see collegiality as why Bishops feel they can do what they want or even downright speak publicly against Catholic teaching or go against the will of the Pope.

Then again, I do not know how Bishops acted in the 1700's for example.

I'm not so sure the Latin Church sees things this way anymore.

I feel the same way--------the majority of the Bishops think they can do as they please &, though I can't cite what they were like in the 18th century either,............in the 40's & 50's, the bishops were obedient, respectful & actually believed that the Pope is the Successor of Peter, the Vicar of Christ..

Not Sure · #60 Jun 29, '12, 10:30 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jane of Arc

I feel the same way--------the majority of the Bishops think they can do as they please &, though I can't cite what they were like in the 18th century either,............in the 40's & 50's, the bishops were obedient, respectful & actually believed that the Pope is the Successor of Peter, the Vicar of Christ..

and in the 60s and 70s many that believed that the Pope was the successor of Peter were the ones who were disobedient, disrespectful, and reigned in the Spirit of Vatican II to try to destroy the Church. as Pope Paul said, the smoke of Satan has entered the Church.