What Would an Byzantine Response Be?

CWR: Celibacy, Chastity, Same-Sex Attraction, Priesthood: Some Necessary Distinctions by Peter M.J. Stravinskas
In the hyper-sexualized society we Christians inhabit, chastity is as counter-cultural today as it was for the early Christians in the decadent Roman Empire.

Fr. Stravinskas refers to this article: “Celibacy and Priests with Same-Sex Attraction” by Ryan M. Williams.

“The Church has always counseled against ordaining those who have same-sex attraction.” On the surface, that would seem to be the case, but a bit of history and psychology might be helpful here. It is undoubtedly true that “the Church has always counseled against ordaining” not “those who have same-sex attraction” but those who act out that attraction. Indeed, “homosexuality” and/or “same-sex attraction” are modern concepts. Prior to the nineteenth century, those categories cannot be found. What made one be considered a homosexual was the fact that one engaged in homosexual activity. Does a man with same-sex attraction who marries a woman contract a valid marriage in the eyes of the Church? Canonical praxis would suggest an affirmative response, which is to say that his “orientation” may make his marriage to a woman more difficult but not necessarily impossible.

Are there however unresolved psychological issues that lie at the origin of the same-sex attraction, which would be an obstacle to effective ministry? This is not a question of a modern "identity" but rather of whether one is psychologically healthy -- even if it is a relative standard (and not the same as holiness or virtuousness) it would seem to be a necessary foundation for public ministry.

(As for the counter-example of the man with SSA who marries a woman -- could not the existence of SSA be later cited as a ground for an annulment, should "things not work out"?)

Christopher Altieri on Day 1

CWR: Day 1 of Vatican summit features peremptory points, harrowing testimonies by Christopher R. Altieri
The highest-level Catholic meeting opened in Rome in the almost surreal conditions created by a heady atmosphere of intense media attention and a swirling maelstrom that threatened to swallow already low expectations.

Related:
CNA: Tagle: Confront the ‘stench of filth’ caused by abuse

A Review of the Martel Book

CWR Dispatch: Review: Not much substance In the Closet of the Vatican by Andrea Gagliarducci, Catholic News Agency
The controversial new book by French author and LGBT activist Frederic Martel presents innuendos, but not evidence or documents. It is a gossip-filled, romanticized book, but does not present itself as a scholarly or objective account.

Meanwhile... Pope proposes 21 ‘reflection points’ for discussion at abuse summit

In regard to one point, that broaches the idea of amending the Code of Canon Law to raise the minimum age of marriage for women from 14 to 16, Scicluna clarified that bishops’ conferences already have the power to create their own legislation in regard to the minimum marriageable age, and that many had already raised the age to 16 for both men and women.

“The pope is suggesting making that universal law,” Scicluna said.

By what authority?

Open Letter From Cardinals Burke and Brandmüller to Conferences of Bishops

NCReg

Rorate Caeli

The 50th Anniversary

From the Jubilee page:

Blessed Pope Paul VI issued a decree February 21, 1969, entitled Quandoquidem Christus, which transformed the status of the Byzantine Catholic Church in the United States, creating the Metropolia of Pittsburgh with two suffragan eparchies — Passaic and Parma. Prior to that, when our ancestors came to this country and brought with them a desire to worship in their own rite and have their own churches, we were part of the Eparchy of Pittsburgh.

The Procession of the Holy Spirit

Orthodox Council of Blachernae 1285:

3. To the same, who say that the Father is, through the Son, the cause of the Spirit, and who cannot conceive the Father as the cause of the hypostasis of the Spirit — giving it existence and being — except through the Son; thus according to them the Son is united to the Father as joint-cause and contributor to the Spirit's existence. This, they say, is supported by the phrase of Saint John of Damascus, "the Father is the projector through the Son of the manifesting Spirit." John of Damascus, De fide orthodoxa, in Kotter, Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos II, 36 PG 94.849B): "He Himself [the Father], then, is mind, the depth of reason, begetter of the Word, and, through the Word, projector of the manifesting Spirit." This, however, can never mean what they say, inasmuch as it clearly denotes the manifestation — through the intermediary of the Son — of the Spirit, whose existence is from the Father. For the same John of Damascus would not have said — in the exact same chapter — that the only cause in the Trinity is God the Father, thus denying, by the use of the word "only," the causative principle to the remaining two hypostases. John of Damascus, De fide orthodoxa, in Kotter, Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos II, 36 PG 94.849B) Nor would he have, again, said elsewhere, "and we speak, likewise, of the Holy Spirit as the 'Spirit of the Son,' yet we do not speak of the Spirit as from the Son." Ibid., 30 PG 94-832B). For both of these views to be true is impossible. To those who have not accepted the interpretation given to these testimonia by the Fathers, but, on the contrary, perceive them in a manner altogether forbidden by them, we pronounce the above recorded resolution and judgment, we cut them off from the membership of the Orthodox, and we banish them from the flock of the Church of God.

4. To the same, who affirm that the Paraclete, which is from the Frather, has its existence through the Son and from the Son, and who again propose as proof the phrase "the Spirit exists through the Son and from the Son." In certain texts [of the Fathers], the phrase denotes the Spirit's shining forth and manifestation. Indeed, the very Paraclete shines form and is manifest eternally through the Son, in the same way that light shines forth and is manifest through the intermediary of the sun's rays; it further denotes the bestowing, giving, and sending of the Spirit to us. It does not, however, mean that it subsists through the Son and from the Son, and that it receives its being through Him and from Him. For this would mean that the Spirit has the Son as cause and source (exactly as it has the Father), not to say that it has its cause and source more so from the Son than from the Father; for it is said that that from which existence is derived likewise is believed to enrich the source and to be the cause of being. To those who believe and say such things, we pronounce the above resolution and judgment, we cut them off from the membership of the Orthodox, and we banish them from the flock of the Church of God.

Greek and Latin Traditions on the Holy Spirit

General Audience of John Paul II, 29 July 1998 - The Holy Spirit as Source of Communion


Exposition of the Tomus of Faith Against Beccus
From Aristeides Papadakis: Crisis in Byzantium: The Filioque Controversy in the Patriarchate of Gregory II of Cyprus (1283-1289)

If the Holy Spirit gives us life as sons of God and gives life to Christ as man, can it be said that He has the same role with respect to the Son as well? (Is this the thesis of Weinandy?)

Or is the life of the Father and Son together a Divine Hypostasis?

Wipf and Stock