Pope expresses hope for reunion with Orthodox Patriarch

  • Thread starter Thread starter Son_of_Niall
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MommaduckofMany said:
More that it would require concession of the Catholics, because we demand doctrinal unity.
Click to expand...
Yes, that’s basically what my point was, but realistically, even a union along the lines of agreeing to disagree but still sharing communion would involve concessions by both sides. Such a union would involve the Orthodox dropping their insistence on doctrinal agreement, while it would involve Rome giving up its insistence on assent to papal infallibility and the universal ordinary jurisdiction of the pope.
 
MommaduckofMany said:
So basically, make it look like the RCC is in agreement with the EOC, but really it’s only a matter of shuffling the deck, changing a few words, continuing on under the rader, and in essence nothing really changed.

Uhm, this is not true unity and not acceptable.
Click to expand...
Statements like this make me glad to know WE are not the ones doing the “navigating”. :rolleyes:

Peace!!!
 
RyanBlack said:
Yes, that’s basically what my point was, but realistically, even a union along the lines of agreeing to disagree but still sharing communion would involve concessions by both sides. Such a union would involve the Orthodox dropping their insistence on doctrinal agreement, while it would involve Rome giving up its insistence on assent to papal infallibility and the universal ordinary jurisdiction of the pope.
Click to expand...
Catholics would go for a union with doctrinal disagreement? What kind of unity is that?
 
MommaduckofMany said:
Catholics would go for a union with doctrinal disagreement? What kind of unity is that?
Click to expand...
I’m not in a position to say that they would–I don’t speak for the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. However, the fact that Catholic canon law already permits individual Orthodox to receive communion suggests to me that the Catholic is more likely than the Orthodox Church to agree to union without complete doctrinal agreement.
 
I certainly hope to see unity within my lifetime. I refuse to be pessimistic on the matter; bemoaning the impossibility of reunion is the very thing that keeps reunion impossible to begin with.

In areas where doctrinal agreement appears to be an issue, we should try to figure out what the other side is actually saying in the first place–the Filioque is a classic example of an issue that should pose no problem to either side, but the Catholics often did a terrible job of explaining the theology to the Orthodox in terms they could understand, while in many cases, the Orthodox were unable to see the theology and context behind the Filioque as it exists in Latin theology.

I think the Papacy is actually a much more malleable situation than the Filioque; the various dogmas issued vis-a-vis the Papacy do not necessarily mean that the Pope MUST be a dictator or absolute monarch over all of Christendom–even if that was essentially the ecclesiology within the Roman Church at the time these dogmas were proclaimed. As far as understanding the Papacy in new terms, I think Pope Francis is making some good legwork in opening up the discussion and presenting some alternative ways of considering the nature and exercising of the Papal office.
 
RyanBlack said:
I’m not in a position to say that they would–I don’t speak for the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. However, the fact that Catholic canon law already permits individual Orthodox to receive communion suggests to me that the Catholic is more likely than the Orthodox Church to agree to union without complete doctrinal agreement.
Click to expand...
except for cases of economia, that’s sad.
 
MommaduckofMany said:
except for cases of economia, that’s sad.
Click to expand...
I don’t know if I’m understanding you correctly or not; but keep in mind that, from the Catholic pov, we may not request communion from any non-Catholic priest (including EO, OO, PNCC, and ACoE) if we have access to a Catholic priest.
 
adf417 said:
This is a very interesting statement NoWings. If you could reverse time to a given point of what you would consider as “once again”, when would that be using Wiki’s time frame below? How will you know when this miracle has happened?
Click to expand...
I’ll know when the Pope and the Patriarch of Moscow say, “Hey, you can intercommune in our churches again.”
 
MommaduckofMany said:
Catholics would go for a union with doctrinal disagreement? What kind of unity is that?
Click to expand...
Really ti is not a matter of flase unity, but a matter of not splitting theological hairs. We respect diverse tradition on, for example, the use of azymes or leavened bread. Teachings on the use of one or another were not a cause for schism until the second millenium.

We can live with that kind of diversity…
 
NoWings said:
I’ll know when the Pope and the Patriarch of Moscow say, “Hey, you can intercommune in our churches again.”
Click to expand...
The Patriarch of Moscow does not have absolute say over the whole of the Eastern Orthodox. Neither does the Patriarch of Constantinople. The agreement must be with ALL of the Patriarchs.

We are closer to union with the OO than we are with the RC. The OO are permitted to share communion in cases of economia. The RC are not and neither are we permitted to share communion with the RC.
 
NoWings said:
I’ll know when the Pope and the Patriarch of Moscow say, “Hey, you can intercommune in our churches again.”
Click to expand...
Ok cool! 👍 So not all of the EO or OO would have to unify for you to consider there to be a miracle?

Peace!!!
 
dvdjs said:
Really ti is not a matter of flase unity, but a matter of not splitting theological hairs. We respect diverse tradition on, for example, the use of azymes or leavened bread. Teachings on the use of one or another were not a cause for schism until the second millenium.

We can live with that kind of diversity…
Click to expand...
Some of the issues are Tradition, not merely tradition.
 
At the risk of seeming random, I was just thinking of something I read a dozen years ago or so. It was about the Anglican-Catholic dialogue in the early 20th century, led by Cardinal Mercier. The particular comment I’m thinking of said something like, The Cardinal initially sought to convert the Archbishop of Canterbury to Roman Catholicism, but instead he himself was converted to ecumenism.
 
MommaduckofMany said:
The Patriarch of Moscow does not have absolute say over the whole of the Eastern Orthodox. Neither does the Patriarch of Constantinople. **The agreement **must be with ALL of the Patriarchs.

We are closer to union with the OO than we are with the RC. The OO are permitted to share communion in cases of economia. The RC are not and neither are we permitted to share communion with the RC.
Click to expand...
What agreement? I asked NoWings what his definition of a miracle would be. I think he is quite capable of telling us that.

Peace!!!
 
adf417 said:
What agreement? I asked NoWings what his definition of a miracle would be. I think he is quite capable of telling us that.

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
It seems that many think it only takes one Patriarch to make decisions for the entire Orthodox Church. This is false. It’s a common misconception.
 
MommaduckofMany said:
It seems that many think it only takes one Patriarch to make decisions for the entire Orthodox Church. This is false. It’s a common misconception.
Click to expand...
👍 I understand ,which was the reason I sent the wiki link describing some of the divisions for clarification and to spur on thought as to what could be meant in the general statement he made.

Peace!!!
 
adf417 said:
👍 I understand ,which was the reason I sent the wiki link describing some of the divisions for clarification and to spur on thought as to what could be meant in the general statement he made.

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
ah, 🙂 Thank you!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top