While I’ve long thought it’s a good thing for the Bishop of Rome to embrace his title of “Patriarch of the West”… I can’t help but find it funny how the man who was once touted as “the people’s pope” who “smelled like the sheep” is now reviving for himself a title that exudes dominance and authority: “I am the PATRIARCH OF THE WEST!” It just sounds strong-handed.
From what I understand, the Orthodox have more concerns about the novelties (and possible heresies) of Fiducia Supplicans than who gets to be "patriarch" of what.
I think it is a significant mistake to assume that just because something appears in the <em>Annuario Pontificio</em> it represents an official change in policy. I highly doubt the Holy Father personally reviewed it before it was published.
My guess is that a junior cleric simply pulled out a dated version and used that as a template. Or looked online.
To ground this in Americana, it is like with NFL and college football, when fans argue about the depth chart the team released. Coaches aren't sitting up all night to create these things; it is some college intern in the public relations office.
While hopefully the comparison is not too direct, my strong guess is that it is simply an editorial error.
Given the long history of this title, and the controversy which carries it, and the fact that all clerics are pretty conversant with those things, I’d be very surprised if that were the case.
However, having read so many stories of Holy See dysfunction over the decades, and heard such stories directly from priests, I would paraphrase the old saying, "Never attribute to theology that which can be attributed to incompetence."
Some of the Orthodox Churches might not care what titles the pope uses.
Others might see this restoration as a way of saying the pope is at least acknowledging the historic order of the pentarchy and that he is within that order as opposed to outside it. He desires to be one with the other Apostolic Churches. It is a hope for unity.
What relates to what the Catholic Churches hold regarding the papacy is quite different.
Primus (round table) inter pares (round tables)
Perhaps Franciscus will resign as Pope but keep the title of Patriarch of the West Indies, presently sede vacante.
No idea re the reasons here but I'm sure that the Papal Court and its tabloid hangers-on are sharing wonderful rumors.
"Sincerely,
The Patriarch of the West."
Kinda has a nice ring to it. Reminds me of the Flame of the West.
Anduril?
Only God understands why Francis says or does what he does. I seem to care less every day.
I'm not really following the synodal argument.
This just seems like a political no brainier. It costs him literally nothing but throws a bone to both the Trads and the orthodox.
Dropping the title was one of the few times BXVI ran afoul of the trads.
Interesting that you fellows decided to use an almost ten-year-old photograph of His Holiness (4 October 2014).
It looks pretty dope though.
If I'm dropping a new album titled "Patriarch of the West," you can bet that would be the cover art.
I wonder if it’s a slight to Kirill of the Russians and KGB lackey and blasphemer…see
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2024/04/when-ideology-and-blasphemy-meet
While I’ve long thought it’s a good thing for the Bishop of Rome to embrace his title of “Patriarch of the West”… I can’t help but find it funny how the man who was once touted as “the people’s pope” who “smelled like the sheep” is now reviving for himself a title that exudes dominance and authority: “I am the PATRIARCH OF THE WEST!” It just sounds strong-handed.
From what I understand, the Orthodox have more concerns about the novelties (and possible heresies) of Fiducia Supplicans than who gets to be "patriarch" of what.
I think it is a significant mistake to assume that just because something appears in the <em>Annuario Pontificio</em> it represents an official change in policy. I highly doubt the Holy Father personally reviewed it before it was published.
My guess is that a junior cleric simply pulled out a dated version and used that as a template. Or looked online.
To ground this in Americana, it is like with NFL and college football, when fans argue about the depth chart the team released. Coaches aren't sitting up all night to create these things; it is some college intern in the public relations office.
While hopefully the comparison is not too direct, my strong guess is that it is simply an editorial error.
Given the long history of this title, and the controversy which carries it, and the fact that all clerics are pretty conversant with those things, I’d be very surprised if that were the case.
I will not disagree too vociferously.
However, having read so many stories of Holy See dysfunction over the decades, and heard such stories directly from priests, I would paraphrase the old saying, "Never attribute to theology that which can be attributed to incompetence."
often my own argument, in fact.
so you might be right.
Some of the Orthodox Churches might not care what titles the pope uses.
Others might see this restoration as a way of saying the pope is at least acknowledging the historic order of the pentarchy and that he is within that order as opposed to outside it. He desires to be one with the other Apostolic Churches. It is a hope for unity.
What relates to what the Catholic Churches hold regarding the papacy is quite different.
Drat!
I planned to declare myself Patriarch of the West!
Oh well, back to Tetrarch ... or was it Prefect? I'll check my membership card and get back to you. Gosh, I hope I paid this years dues!