Is there a movement for Catholic and Orthodox to join back together?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bmaz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vonsalza said:
I think the material part of that discussion is over.
Click to expand...
Thanks. With regards to the original question - Is there a movement for Catholic and Orthodox to join back together - there is ecumenical dialog going on between Catholic and Orthodox, but I don’t see any reunion in sight as long as the Catholic Church maintains its teaching on the universal jurisdiction and infallibility of the Catholic Pope. I don’t expect the Orthodox to accept anything more than his primacy of honor.
 
Last edited:
Per Cardinal Ratzinger’s suggestions a unified Church will almost certainly be one where immediate jurisdiction concerning the historically Orthodox Churches will be more hands off than with the western Churches. I’m paraphrasing, of course.

The main obstacle is always the hardliners on each side.
 
Both East and West have been doing fine overall the last 1000 years. After all, we are both still here! Also, we do not seem to really need one another - you cannot really say that after a millenium of separation.
So the truth is: We have grown very much estranged and there is no real interest to join again apart from some people in the upper hierarchies and some ecumenists.
The average parishioner on both sides does not care at all. This is why nothing will happen.
 
Last edited:
That is a very interesting perspective. It is true we are separated by our languages, geographic borders, cultures and some theological undertakings.

Remember when the persecution laws were lifted. Both sides of the Church surfaced and came from hiding. This unification came by Imperial secular rule, until tensions in the East became evident by heresies and schism, that ultimately bled into a power struggle between the Bishop of Rome and Constantinople.

In a sense, the Church officially on her own never put forth an effort to make a communal bridge between the East and West, mainly due to so many centuries past by them, while under persecution. Yet, when the Imperial persecution laws were lifted. The Church experienced a freedom in the world, She never experienced. This was all new to her.

I like what you said here; “After all, we are both still here!”. Could it be we are back in the day’s, when we were both living under persecution’s, and separated by languages, geographical regions, secular powers and cultures? Where communication between the East and West was at best minimal and that each side was still existing?

I agree with you that being separated by borders and estranged by time, that we both survived many test and trials apart from each other. I sense no love lost here, mainly due for the fact, we never communed or associated in faith with one another. Yet for some reason, these past decades, we find ourselves communicating with one another, as the borders that separate us, begin to shrink. Albeit, our communication between East and West at times, appears that we have never been apart, as we engage on subjects and attacks against one another as siblings do.

Let us pray; Father, grant me the wisdom to understand my estranged brother’s and sisters, forgive any and all my trespasses, I may have committed against you and my fellow brother’s and sisters in faith and forgive those who trespass against me. Lord, I pray for a sensitive spirit of understanding, to admit when I am wrong, and I pray for the courage to correct my wrong doing. Lord, you know all man’s heart’s and thoughts, I pray for a heart that yearns and misses to be united with my Orthodox brethren in faith, when ever we meet in person again, with a joy and love to be a witness to the world as was once said about our Father’s from antiquity , “See how these Christians love each other”.
Hail Mary…
 
Both East and West have been doing fine overall the last 1000 years. After all, we are both still here! Also, we do not seem to really need one another - you cannot really say that after a millenium of separation.
So the truth is: We have grown very much estranged and there is no real interest to join again apart from some people in the upper hierarchies and some ecumenists.
The average parishioner on both sides does not care at all. This is why nothing will happen.
Click to expand...
The question isn’t whether the average parishioner cares or not. The question is whether Christ would want his Church united.

And the truth is that, no matter how people might wish it, the East and West have not being doing “fine overall”. The Orthodox community has not done as well in numbers as the West, and everywhere we are all under attack in this secular age. Just today the Orthodox suffered a further rupture in that the Russian Orthodox has severed in some fashion from Constantinople.

There should be one Church. It isn’t just the some people in upper hierarchies and some ecumenists that desire it and at least to a certain extent our tribal natures are what operates to keep a reunion from occurring, which is bad and which both leaders in the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches have acknowledged as sinful. The rift has gone on long enough and ought to be repaired, which would require us to set aside old grievances that are not founded in theological questions and to tackle the theological questions honestly.
 
OriginalGabrielof12 said:
That is a very interesting perspective. It is true we are separated by our languages, geographic borders, cultures and some theological undertakings.
Click to expand...
It might be more accurate, to say “we were separated” in the fashions you noted.
Hardly noticed to some degree is that the Catholic Church is being reinforced by the infusion of vigor from African Catholics and at least in some places in the US the Orthodox churches now have dropped the national qualifier from their identities. At least one new church sponsored locally by a Greek Orthodox Church has been careful to simply identify itself as “Orthodox Christian”, and not Greek Orthodox".
These trends reflect the fact that the church cannot, in the modern era, be “Greek”, or “Irish” or “Polish” or “Russian”, and its not going to be. And as disaffected Protestants join the East and the West the national aspect of various churches, already pretty much a thing of the past in the west in the Catholic Church, is going to become a thing of the past there in the Orthodox as well. Perhaps at that point we’ll all do better in overcoming a rift which has less and less to do with any of our actual ancestors and old cultures, and be able to take this thing on fresh.
 
I stand by what I said: Both East and West have been doing fine overall.
It is true, a lot of (bad) things have happened over the last millennium, but both churches are still there and liturgy is celebrated in both to this day. This is what really matters.
Persecution and attacks have happened and are happening, the East has suffered a lot more than the West in this regard. But one must try to see this in a positive light, Matthew 5,11.
Of course, the ideal is a united church (John 17), but we are never getting closer to that because there are differences founded in theological questions which cannot be ignored.
I really desire a reunion between East and West, the schism affects my personal life very much, being married to an Eastern Orthodox Christian. I would be so glad, you cannot imagine.
However, I do know that nothing short of a miracle can bring it about.
It is only the upper hierarchy and certain groups within the laity, the people with higher education, primarily in the West who care about a possible reconciliation between East and West. As this is happening in the social bubble you and I are living in, therefore one is tempted to think that this is a widespread sentiment. But I tell you it is not. Talk to a pious Russian farmer whether he desires reunion with Rome or considers it as something important. Talk to the old Catholic Mexican matron what she knows (!) and thinks about the Patriarch of Constantinople. People at the base, the vast majority of the faithful, do not care. You only observe a biased sample in the Western hemisphere - the world is so much larger.
 
Last edited:
Yeoman said:
There should be one Church.
Click to expand...
Why did the Roman Catholic church fire the first shot and excommunicate Patriarch Cerularius for various reasons, including omitting the filioque from the creed? The original creed did not have the filioque and I don’t know why Roman Catholics thought that omitting it from the creed was a reason for excommunication. I think it would have been better to approach these questions in fraternal Christian charity, rather than placing a papal bull of excommunication on the altar of the Hagia Sophia without any discussion. Now, 1000 years have passed and the Roman Church insists on papal infallibility and universal papal jurisdiction. I doubt that the Russian Orthodox Church is going to accept papal jurisdiction over its Churches. They don’t even accept the jurisdiction of the Greek Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch as we see in Ukraine.
 
2 days after October 13th the Anniversary of Fatima. The russian orthodox decides
to cut ties with constantinople! I think, according to catholic apparitions the russian orthodox
will eventually join as eastern catholic church. But, russia has to be consecrated to Mary’s immaculate heart first.
 
AlNg said:
. I doubt that the Russian Orthodox Church is going to accept papal jurisdiction over its Churches. They don’t even accept the jurisdiction of the Greek Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch as we see in Ukraine.
Click to expand...
@AlNg I’d like your (name removed by moderator)ut about the recent Moscow-Constantinople schism.

Are the schismatics Russian Orthodox? Or are the schismatics the Ecumenical Patriarchate?
 
ChristMyLife said:
Are the schismatics Russian Orthodox? Or are the schismatics the Ecumenical Patriarchate?
Click to expand...
It looks to me like it is the Greek EP who has unlawfully embraced the schismatics in Ukraine:

Statement by the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church concerning the encroachment of the Patriarchate of Constantinople on the canonical territory of the Russian Church​

This is the direct link: Statement by the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church concerning the encroachment of the Patriarchate of Constantinople on the canonical territory of the Russian Church

With profound pain the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church has taken the report of the Patriarchate of Constantinople published on October 11, 2018, about the following decisions of the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Constantinople: confirming the intention ‘to grant autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church; opening a ‘stauropegion’ of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in Kiev; ‘restoring in the rank of bishop or priest’ the leaders of the Ukrainian schism and their followers and ‘returning their faithful to church communion’; ‘recalling the 1686 patent of the Patriarchate of Constantinople on the transfer of the Metropolis of Kiev to the Moscow Patriarchate as its part.

These unlawful decisions of the Synod were adopted by the Church of Constantinople unilaterally, ignoring the appeals of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the plenitude of the Russian Orthodox Church as well as sister Local Orthodox Churches, their primates and hierarchs to hold a pan-Orthodox discussion of the issue.

Entering into communion with those who deviated into schism and the more so with those who are excommunicated from the Church is tantamount to deviation into schism and is severely condemned by the canons of the Holy Church: ‘If any one of the bishops, presbyters, or deacons, or any one in the Canon shall be found communicating with excommunicated persons, let him also be excommunicated as one who brings confusion on the order of the Church’ (Council of Antioch Canon 2; Apostolic Canons 10, 11).
For the complete statement, please go to the link

 
Why didn’t the EP wait and hold a Council with the MP and other Orthodox on the issue?

Was there some reason why the EP rushed to do this how it was done?
 
AlNg said:
Why did the Roman Catholic church fire the first shot and excommunicate Patriarch Cerularius for various reasons, including omitting the filioque from the creed?
Click to expand...
Part of the reason this problem persists is that reunification is held up by the constant dredging up of old, old actions. Why? Who cares why? What can we do now? That’s the real question.

Why did the Orthodox commit the Massacre of the Latins? Why did the Crusaders sack Constantinople? Why did one side do this or that? It is all wholly irrelevant now, unless it pertains to an issue we need to cover now. Most Catholics in the world aren’t even of the same ethnicities that participated in these various actions that occurred so long ago. A lot of Orthodox aren’t either, and as time goes on, less and less of them will be either.

The bigger question who isn’t did what centuries ago, which will ultimately devolved into different version of that argument that are partisan, serve to divide. Why argue about them now?

On the filoque, as you no doubt know, in the Eastern Rite it is not there. The current Catholic understanding of it does not or does not have to depart greatly in understanding if at all from the Orthodox understanding of the Creed. Almost all of the supposed issues that divide us are pretty much like this. We could overcome them and actually have numerous times before.
 
mario_p said:
2 days after October 13th the Anniversary of Fatima. The russian orthodox decides
to cut ties with constantinople! I think, according to catholic apparitions the russian orthodox
will eventually join as eastern catholic church. But, russia has to be consecrated to Mary’s immaculate heart first.
Click to expand...
I’m not an expert on Russia by any means, but is that actually an accepted aspect of the apparitions? I’ve never heard that. I know that we used to "pray for the conversion of Russia at Mass and no longer do, but I’ve heard it generally claimed t hat this was accomplished by the fall of Communism.
And I believe its well accepted that the Consecration of Russia has been accomplished and that one of the seers in fact acknowledged that to Pope St. John Paul II.
 
AlNg said:
It looks to me like it is the Greek EP who has unlawfully embraced the schismatics in Ukraine:
Click to expand...
Well a person can’t merely accept the position of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church as to who is schismatic (which doesn’t mean that it should simply be disregarded either). Nobody going into schism declares themselves to be schismatic.

Particularly from the outside, this is a difficult question and a person should be careful in deciding who is in schism and who is not, particularly given its gravity and the potential implications on a person’s soul. This must be a nightmare for thoughtful members of both communities who now, if they are thoughtful, have to struggle who is in schism and where they do or do not go to Divine Liturgy next Sunday.
 
Last edited:
Yeoman said:
On the filoque, as you no doubt know, in the Eastern Rite it is not there. The current Catholic understanding of it does not or does not have to depart greatly in understanding if at all from the Orthodox understanding of the Creed.
Click to expand...
The omission of the filioque was a reason given in the papal bull to excommunicate Michael Cerularius.
Yeoman said:
Part of the reason this problem persists is that reunification is held up by the constant dredging up of old, old actions.
Click to expand...
WWII is not all that old. Please read about the Jasenovac concentration camp where Serbian Orthodox were tortured and a Catholic clergyman Miroslav Filipovic was in charge as a commandant. Also, please read about the massacre carried out by the Ustase against people in an Orthodox Church at Glina.
 
Last edited:
Yeoman said:
Well a person can’t merely accept the position of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church as to who is schismatic
Click to expand...
You can read the canons of the church: (Council of Antioch Canon 2; Apostolic Canons 10, 11) to see that you are excommunicated if you enter into communion with someone who is excommunicated.
 
AlNg said:
You can read the canons of the church: (Council of Antioch Canon 2; Apostolic Canons 10, 11) to see that you are excommunicated if you enter into communion with someone who is excommunicated.
Click to expand...
The problem is, as of now, only Moscow has broken communion with Constantinople (from what I’ve read, they have not encouraged other churches to do so). So Constantinople went into schism by entering into communion with the schismatic Ukrainians. But all the other Churches other than Moscow still maintain communion with Constantinople–does that make them schismatic now too? And Moscow remains in communion with those in communion with schismatic Constantinople–so is Moscow now also schismatic?

This kind of thing is of course not really new in the EO world. For example, during the Bulgarian schism, Moscow itself remained in communion with both the Bulgarian Church and the rest of the EO world who considered the Bulgarians schismatic.

Being in communion with schismatics is not always treated so strictly in EO praxis.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top