Just be cautious about the affirmation beneath the photo; the man visible here is Syrian catholic Bishop Mons Jamil, the patriarchal Prokurator in Rome, residung in Sta. Maria in Campo Marzo. The existance of the Maronites as a separate entity only can be explained via a schism - there are five different occupants of the Patriarchal Throne of St. Peter in Antioch. The first one happened at the Council of Ephesus 431, hence the so denominated 'Monophysites', or Jacobites, the remainder remaining with the Emperor - hence in syr. Melkites. Thus far we have the analogous situation in the PAtriarchate of Alexandria. Yet the Melkite group - Chalcedonians as the Romans at the time, suffered another schism due to the intervention of Emperor Heraklios, 'forcing the different groups to reconcile for stability of the Empire' proposing a reconciliatory formula to both in the form of 'Monothelism' - Christ having only ONE will, the Divine one. Here St. Maximos the Confessor enters the field of combat defending the dogma of Chalcedon against the Emperor and those who fpllowed him, amongst others the monks of the Monastery of Mar Maroun. Dokuments from the city of Aleppo show clearly the existance of this schism between 'maronite' and 'maximite' Melkites, Aleppo in greek Beroea, is the second See of the PAtriarchate after Antioch itself in importance. Saint Maximos the Confessor is a commonly venerated Saint in Orthodoxy And the Roman Church. The Maronites then created their own PAtriarchate, thus we have reached three incumbents to the Antiochian PAtriarchate. In the 18th century then groups from the Jacobites and maximite - then greek Orthodox - the latter in 1742 - entered comunion with Rome, each one claiming the Patriarchal Throne of St. Peter in Antioch as well - hence 5 Patriarchates.
Back to the Maronites: they regarded the Crusaders as their kinsmen and brethren, most likely having forgotten the historic reasons for their seperate existance as a Church, thus declaring inconditional alleagance with the Crusaders, thus with Rome.
They were Catholic before we were and have remained faithful with unbroken succession. 
If it interests you, learn more about the head coverings of the Maronite clergy and prelates.
ReplyDeleteJust be cautious about the affirmation beneath the photo; the man visible here is Syrian catholic Bishop Mons Jamil, the patriarchal Prokurator in Rome, residung in Sta. Maria in Campo Marzo. The existance of the Maronites as a separate entity only can be explained via a schism - there are five different occupants of the Patriarchal Throne of St. Peter in Antioch.
ReplyDeleteThe first one happened at the Council of Ephesus 431, hence the so denominated 'Monophysites', or Jacobites, the remainder remaining with the Emperor - hence in syr. Melkites. Thus far we have the analogous situation in the PAtriarchate of Alexandria. Yet the Melkite group - Chalcedonians as the Romans at the time, suffered another schism due to the intervention of Emperor Heraklios, 'forcing the different groups to reconcile for stability of the Empire' proposing a reconciliatory formula to both in the form of 'Monothelism' - Christ having only ONE will, the Divine one. Here St. Maximos the Confessor enters the field of combat defending the dogma of Chalcedon against the Emperor and those who fpllowed him, amongst others the monks of the Monastery of Mar Maroun. Dokuments from the city of Aleppo show clearly the existance of this schism between 'maronite' and 'maximite' Melkites, Aleppo in greek Beroea, is the second See of the PAtriarchate after Antioch itself in importance. Saint Maximos the Confessor is a commonly venerated Saint in Orthodoxy And the Roman Church.
The Maronites then created their own PAtriarchate, thus we have reached three incumbents to the Antiochian PAtriarchate. In the 18th century then groups from the Jacobites and maximite - then greek Orthodox - the latter in 1742 - entered comunion with Rome, each one claiming the Patriarchal Throne of St. Peter in Antioch as well - hence 5 Patriarchates.
Back to the Maronites: they regarded the Crusaders as their kinsmen and brethren, most likely having forgotten the historic reasons for their seperate existance as a Church, thus declaring inconditional alleagance with the Crusaders, thus with Rome.
Let not 'romance' prevail, but facts.