Przyczyny i konsekwencje rezygnacji Benedykta XVI z tytułu „Patriarchy Zachodu”

Abstract

The purpose of this article is an attempt to understand why Pope Benedict XVI, decided that in the Annuario Pontifìcio for 2006 among the titles that define his ministry will no longer determine the “Patriarch of the West” The event triggered protests and outrage Orthodox parties, both the Moscow Patriarchate and ecumenical. Also, many Catholic theologians, including Cardinal Kasper expressed their disapproval, claiming that it will have a negative impact on relation with Orthodoxy. The main reason was to protest, said Bishop Hilarion that the Orthodox Church would accept the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, but only in terms of primus inter pares, within the Pentarchy institution, from the limited jurisdiction of the Pope to the Western Church, Latin.The abandonment of the title: Patriarch of the West is seen as a departure from previous treatment the Bishop of Rome in the Catholic-Orthodox dialogue and as a betrayal by the theologian Joseph Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI, who in those 70s and 80s the last century, claimed that it is obvious to separate the different levels of authority the Bishop of Rome and the Orthodox should not be offered more than it was in the first millenium of the Church. The main defender of Pope Benedict XVI is Adriano Garuti OFM. The Italian theologian points out that the Holy Father did was right for giving up from the title of the “Patriarch of the West” because, firstly, he is not him, at least in the Orthodox sense of the term, and secondly, the title suggests that the Bishop of Rome was just one of the five patriarchs in the Pentarchy structure, with a function of honorary chairman. This title denies the same, at least indirectly the dogma of Vatican Council I, of the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome. The decision of Pope Benedict XVI makes it clear on what grounds and what direction in ecumenical dialogue on the primacy in the Church should be brought.