May you live in interesting time. This is an ancient Chinese curse. One might think it somehow has been applied to the present Christian liturgical world. Most of us have been raised to believe that large institutions change very slowly, and church institution even more slowly.
Well, this has been, since the reign of the current occupant of the See of St. Peter in Rome, turned topsy turvy. Most of the change seem to have been initiated by Pope Benedict XVI.
Two examples during this period: The Anglican world has become completely fractured with many active worldwide Anglicans in the process of severing ties with the ancient Anglican See of Canterbury in England as well as the Episcopal Church in the USA. The intent is for the various Anglo Catholic and some other groups to establish a conciliar Anglican See.
The process involving the question of the primacy of Rome with the Eastern Orthodox Churches may actually bring an acceptable mutual understanding of the role and relationship of both sides. It is entirely possible that such an announcement may come as early as next Spring.
Talk about challenges to accepted ways of viewing one’s Church and its relationship with the larger body of Christ. The excerpts from the article below show some of the thinking which has yielded this ferment and possibility.
Deo Gloria—— Fr, Orthohippo (photo is actually of me)
Written in Latin, around the base of the big dome in the interior of Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome, are the following words: Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam et tibi dabo claves regni caelorum. This phrase is an extract from Mt. 16:17-19, which presents Jesus’ words to the apostle Peter: “I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church…. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” (1) It is clear that this inscription is indicative of the mission entrusted to Peter. Very often in Roman Catholic circles–and not without criticism–reference has been made to this text in support of papal primacy. (2) Papal ministry, which is considered a symbol and instrument of the church’s unity, has paradoxically turned out to be a stumbling block on the road toward such unity. (3) This is so partly because of the manner in which papal ministry understands itself and has exercised its authority down through the centuries. (4) Orthodox theologians such as Mesrob Krikorian, emeritus archbishop of the Armenian Apostolic Church, have consistently criticized the traditional Catholic understanding and the practice of primacy as having evolved from being a ministry of service to an instrument of power and authority. (5) The many criticisms levied against this ministry indicate the need for thoroughgoing revision of its understanding and exercise.
Papal primacy is a thorny issue in the Roman Catholic Church ad intra and ad extra. (10) It is not a surprise, therefore, that papal primacy has become a favorite subject in recent ecumenical dialogues. Two reasons may help to explain why this is so. First, there is a growing need for a clear theological basis for “papal primacy”; this has been occasioned in turn by the rise of new methods and skills of biblical scholarship coupled with a renewed ecumenical dispensation. Second, and more importantly, the day-to-day functioning of papal primacy has raised pertinent questions, many of which have to do with the prestige and power that are associated with this ministry. Hence, for example, the former archbishop of San Francisco, John Quinn, in 1999 published a book titled The Reform of the Papacy, in which he lamented a lack of consultation and the centralization of power to the curia leading to what he called a “self-seeking” type of papacy in the Catholic Church. He maintained that the papacy needs to undergo thorough reform to allow for “[c]ollegiality, participation of the laity, decentralization, and greater openness to diversity.” (11) With regard to the participation of the laity, Quinn called for consultation of the laity in the appointment of bishops. The pope’s appointment of bishops by consulting merely the clergy at the expense of the laity contributes to poorly received and ineffective bishops. Hence, Quinn pleaded for aggionamento in the self-understanding and function of papal ministry, in the light of the renewed ecumenical dispensation.