Post by Pacelli on Nov 20, 2018 18:52:41 GMT -5
A new criticism was made against my post, “Where is the Catholic Church Today? (2017).” The person has taken issue with my stating that the eastern rite diocesan bishops that have kept the Faith are maintaining the apostolic succession.
(Its worth noting as an aside, that I acknowledge the fact that Latin rite retired bishops appointed prior to the June, 1968 new rite would have been lawful appointments and would remain in their offices, even if they think they are retired unless they fell away from the Faith.)
The person took issue with this stating that the catholicity of the Church would no longer be present if the only bishops remaining who are using their offices are eastern rite bishops, as they are isolated only to certain countries.
There are two issues I have with the argument:
1. It is factually incorrect. The eastern rites are found on every continent in varying degrees. They are universal in scope as they are found in all corners of the world. I posted “Where are the Eastern Rites found throughout the World?” a while back which gives a good breakdown of where the eastern rites are located throughout the world. LINK.
No one, not a single person, has ever made a credible case of heresy against all of the eastern rite ordinaries, which must be done prior to presuming guilt against any or all of them. Unless this can be proven, any judgement made against them as a group or as to an individual bishop is rash. Accusations must be substantiated or they are sinful. Unless a case can be made against them as a group, or against a particular bishop, the charge of heresy cannot be presumed. No one can justly conclude that they have lost the Faith, have become heretics, and by that lost their offices.
2. The fact that the Roman Sees are vacant, or at least not functioning throughout the world does not mean that the Church is dead in these dioceses, it is just leaderless either factually or practically speaking. The Dioceses of the Roman Rite are still not wiped out, so long as there are still Catholics in those diocesess that keep the Faith.
(Its worth noting as an aside, that I acknowledge the fact that Latin rite retired bishops appointed prior to the June, 1968 new rite would have been lawful appointments and would remain in their offices, even if they think they are retired unless they fell away from the Faith.)
The person took issue with this stating that the catholicity of the Church would no longer be present if the only bishops remaining who are using their offices are eastern rite bishops, as they are isolated only to certain countries.
There are two issues I have with the argument:
1. It is factually incorrect. The eastern rites are found on every continent in varying degrees. They are universal in scope as they are found in all corners of the world. I posted “Where are the Eastern Rites found throughout the World?” a while back which gives a good breakdown of where the eastern rites are located throughout the world. LINK.
No one, not a single person, has ever made a credible case of heresy against all of the eastern rite ordinaries, which must be done prior to presuming guilt against any or all of them. Unless this can be proven, any judgement made against them as a group or as to an individual bishop is rash. Accusations must be substantiated or they are sinful. Unless a case can be made against them as a group, or against a particular bishop, the charge of heresy cannot be presumed. No one can justly conclude that they have lost the Faith, have become heretics, and by that lost their offices.
2. The fact that the Roman Sees are vacant, or at least not functioning throughout the world does not mean that the Church is dead in these dioceses, it is just leaderless either factually or practically speaking. The Dioceses of the Roman Rite are still not wiped out, so long as there are still Catholics in those diocesess that keep the Faith.