Pope to Patriarch: We Need Unity Faster

[Chellow]

Benedict XVI Tells Alexy II the Times Urge Haste

By Inmaculada Álvarez

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 6, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI sent a personal message to Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II saying that modern times call for a hastening of the journey toward Christian unity.

The Sept. 22 message was hand-delivered to Alexy II by the archbishop of Naples, Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe, on an official visit to Moscow at the invitation of the patriarch. The cardinal gave the message to the patriarch in a meeting that lasted a little more than an hour last Thursday.

“I have a deep affection for all the Orthodox brethren, and I am particularly close to them in these most recent days when conflict has caused significant suffering to peoples so dear to me,” the Holy Father said. “I never cease to offer daily prayers for peace, asking the Lord that the appeals of Your Holiness to resolve all hostility for the good of the nations may be heeded.”

He added: "Faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ is a bond that unites hearts in a profound way and invites us all to strengthen our commitment to manifest to the world a shared witness of living together respectfully and peacefully.

“Our times, marked so often by conflict and grief, make it even more necessary to hasten the journey toward the full unity of all the disciples of Christ, so that the joyous message of salvation may be spread to all humanity.”… Read More

 

[piperspop]

This is really great news!!!
Perhaps Pope Benedict will now respond to the request for corporate unity with the Traditional Anglican Communion that has been sitting on his desk for a year.
I know we’re not the Russian Church, but if he is truly anxious to get going on the path to Christian unity (not conversion and absorption) we would be a great place to start.

For those who are interested, here is an address given by the head of the Anglican Church in America (part of the TAC),
on the subject of Christian Unity.

themessenger.com.au/News/20080723.htm

 

[AlanF]

The sooner this happens the better.

They’ve already agreed upon Papal Primacy so I don’t think there’d be much more to do, I beleive that was the main argument back in the day.

 

[CapIV]

The sooner this happens the better.

They’ve already agreed upon Papal Primacy so I don’t think there’d be much more to do, I beleive that was the main argument back in the day.

Actually, the main argument back in the day was about the Filioque.

 

[AlanF]

Actually, the main argument back in the day was about the Filioque.

I though Papal Primacy was bigger than that. The Filioque seems like a rather minor difference to me.

 

[manualman]

The Filioque was an issue because it was inserted via the excercise of papal primacy!

Had it been diplomatically discussed at greater length, both side would have realized that each had a good point and that langugage barriers had tended to distort the understanding of each. Both sides argument CAN be interpreted in a way which seems unorthodox. Both sides arguments about the Holy Spirit are correct when understood properly.

 

[CatholicCid]

I remember reading that they take more of an issue with what they see as Papal supremacy, never having had an issue with Papal primacy.

Take it with a grain of salt.

The sooner this happens the better.

They’ve already agreed upon Papal Primacy so I don’t think there’d be much more to do, I beleive that was the main argument back in the day.

 

[bobzills]

Actually it would be pretty easy to have unity almost immediately, if the Roman Catholic Church would only agree to a few recommendations which have been indicated by the Eastern Orthodox. However, the Roman Catholic Church does not want to agree to these few recommendations, so that basically kills any chance of real unity for now, although, still, there are reasons to believe that relations between the two Churches are warming up somewhat.

 

[jimmy]

The sooner this happens the better.

They’ve already agreed upon Papal Primacy so I don’t think there’d be much more to do, I beleive that was the main argument back in the day.

Papal primacy has never been a problem. Papal supremacy and papal infallibility are still problems with the east. They see them as contrary to the faith of the early Church.

The article is interesting but you shouldn’t look at the relationship between the two Churches as if they are about to unite. That does not seem to be the case. It will most likely take a long time for reunion to occur.

 

[AlanF]

Actually it would be pretty easy to have unity almost immediately, if the Roman Catholic Church would only agree to a few recommendations which have been indicated by the Eastern Orthodox. However, the Roman Catholic Church does not want to agree to these few recommendations, so that basically kills any chance of real unity for now, although, still, there are reasons to believe that relations between the two Churches are warming up somewhat.

What recommendations are these?

 

[KingAlfred]

The sooner this happens the better.

They’ve already agreed upon Papal Primacy so I don’t think there’d be much more to do, I beleive that was the main argument back in the day.

Actually, that and the all-important nature of the Trinity (e.g., the ‘tree-in-one’ question). Dunno if that has been resolved, or can be.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I don’t want to start a Catholic/Orthodox war of words here. Once started, they go on forever.

I think the Pope needs to do what he did, and hope springs eternal. But it’s my impression that reunion is a long, long way off; particularly with the Russian Orthodox Church, among the various Orthodox groups.

I could be wrong about this, and I’m not too sure what every issue is with TAC, but I would say reunion with the TAC folks is a lot closer.

 

[AlanF]

Actually, that and the all-important nature of the Trinity (e.g., the ‘tree-in-one’ question). Dunno if that has been resolved, or can be.

I don’t think they disagreed with the Trinity, that was the Gnostics.

They disagreed with the word “Filioque” being added to the Niceaen Creed, but as manualman said if they had discussed it and understood it they didn’t actually dispute the theology of it.

 

[bobzills]

What recommendations are these?

Yes, if the Roman Catholic Church would agree to compromise and change its teachins on a few points, there would be reunion very quickly. For examples of a few teachings that would have to change in order that the reunion would take place:

1. the doctrine of papal infallibility.
2. the Pope with administrative control over all bishops, including those of the East.
3. the Pope as not subject to a council of bishops.
4. the filioque
5. purgatory
6. indulgences
7. the “immaculate conception.”
8. original sin
9. baptism by sprinkling and not triple immersion.
10. Christians are not married by a priest, but by each other.
11. unleavened bread used for the Eucharist
12. use of statues (violation of prohibition against graven images).
13. denial of need for epiclesis in the Eucharist
14. celibacy for priests
15. development of doctrine.
16. separating the Mystery of Chrismation from the Mystery of Baptism.
17. juridical and legalistic view of salvation
18. Halloween Masses, clown Masses, Dracula Masses, balloon Masses, Chinese dragon Masses, coming out Masses, charismatic Masses, etc.
19. Organ music, guitar music, and other instrumental music played during the liturgy
20. fasting of only one hour before receiving Holy Communion
21. Communion Services conducted by female ministers
22. Catholics do not recognize St. Photius as a Saint.
23. Method of calculating date for Easter
24. Acquiring an Orthodox phronema
25. Incorrect method of making the sign of the cross.
26. And there are a few others which I will leave for later on.

 

[jimmy]

I don’t think they disagreed with the Trinity, that was the Gnostics.

They disagreed with the word “Filioque” being added to the Niceaen Creed, but as manualman said if they had discussed it and understood it they didn’t actually dispute the theology of it.

They do dispute the theology. They do not say that the Spirit proceeds equally and eternally from the Father and the Son. They deny the idea. So it is a dispute over the nature of the Trinity. The two major issues are the filioque and the issues of the pope’s authority. That said, if the popes position was solved then the issue with the filioque would probably quickly follow.

bobzills, many of those are certainly issues that must be solved but some of them are issues that I think the EO would be able to work with through the concept of oikonomia. I am particularly thinking of the use of unleavened bread, priestly celibacy as a rule in the west, sign of the cross, statues and a few others.

It is most likely going to take a long time for reunion to occur.

 

[bobzills]

bobzills, many of those are certainly issues that must be solved but some of them are issues that I think the EO would be able to work with through the concept of oikonomia. I am particularly thinking of the use of unleavened bread, priestly celibacy as a rule in the west, sign of the cross, statues and a few others.

It is most likely going to take a long time for reunion to occur.

As it is now, priests in the Eastern Catholic Churches in the USA are required generally to observe the rule of celibacy. Do you really think that if a reunion were to occur, that the Eastern Orthodox would go along with requiring and mandating celibacy for the Eastern Catholic priests?

 

[AlanF]

1. the doctrine of papal infallibility.

That was defined by an Ecumenical Council, it can’t be revoked.

1. the Pope with administrative control over all bishops, including those of the East.

They’ve already accepted Papal Primacy, but I expect the Patriarchs of the different rites would have administrative power with the Pope.

1. the filioque

The Churches would have to agree on the doctrine of the Trinity first.

1. purgatory

The Orthodox believe this, it’s more likely they’ll come to agree with the RC Church.

1. indulgences

Since they believe in purgatory it is more likely the Orthodox will come to agree with Indulgences.
They did untill the middle of the 20th century have “absolution certificates”.

1. the “immaculate conception.”

They won’t revoke that because it has been defined infallibly.
The Orthodox already believe that Mary was sinless throughout her life, so if they agree one the definition of Original Sin they would probably agree with this also.

1. original sin

I don’t know what they’d do about this one but I do know the Catholic Church is not just going to abandon it’s teaching on it to suit the Orthodox.

1. baptism by sprinkling and not triple immersion.

The Catholic Church considers Baptism by sprinkling valid only when the water actually flows on the new christians head, so it is equivalent to pouring,and pouring has been used since apostolic times (it’s in the Didache).
Claiming pouring is invalid would be silly, I don’t think we have any difference here.

1. Christians are not married by a priest, but by each other.

According to Wikipedia, “The Sacrament of Marriage does not unite a man and a woman. Rather, it is the Church’s recognition of a union that God has already begun to work in their lives.”, so unless Wiki’s wrong again they blieve the same as we do.

1. unleavened bread used for the Eucharist

Jesus used unleavened bread so if anyone has to change on that it can be the Orthodox; I don’t think anyone has to change on that anyway, the RC Church recognises both as valid.

1. use of statues (violation of prohibition against graven images).

1. denial of need for epiclesis in the Eucharist

The Catholic Church has more unanimity in that only the words of the institution have to be spoken, the Orthodox differ on whether the Epiklesis is neccessary. So it’d more likely end up with agreement on the Catholic doctrine and this just being a liturgical point (which would be different for different rites anyway).

1. celibacy for priests

That’s only a discipline and not a matter of doctrine.

1. development of doctrine.

If the Orthodox believe in the Trinity even a bit then they’ll believe in doctrinal developement.

1. separating the Mystery of Chrismation from the Mystery of Baptism.

They are separate Sacraments (Acts 8:14-17), the Orthodox know this and only do it at the same time as Baptism. The Catholic Church cannot chnge that anyway because the Council of Trent said anyone who denies the seven sacraments in anathema.

1. juridical and legalistic view of salvation

Not sure about that, the Catholics believe one must be baptised and have confessed their sins since or if they can’t then if they truely repent then they are saved. I don’t think there’s any major doctinal difference here.

1. Halloween Masses, clown Masses, Dracula Masses, balloon Masses, Chinese dragon Masses, coming out Masses, charismatic Masses, etc.

I agree with this.
This should never have happened in the first place.

1. Organ music, guitar music, and other instrumental music played during the liturgy

That’s just a liturgical difference, the liturgy would be different between rites anyway.

1. fasting of only one hour before receiving Holy Communion

I would change that back to 2 hours, it always was in the past.

1. Communion Services conducted by female ministers

That’s not supposed to happen in the Catholic church anyway, after a few years of Pope Benedict there should be less of this nonsence.

1. Catholics do not recognize St. Photius as a Saint.

That could easily change.

1. Method of calculating date for Easter

They’d have to both compromise on something for this, I don’t one sidecave.

1. Incorrect method of making the sign of the cross.

The Catholics could easily change that too, I do it the older way.

 

[bobzills]

bobzills, many of those are certainly issues that must be solved but some of them are issues that I think the EO would be able to work with through the concept of oikonomia. I am particularly thinking of the use of unleavened bread, priestly celibacy as a rule in the west, sign of the cross, statues and a few others.

It is most likely going to take a long time for reunion to occur.

If Catholics are really and truly interested in unity with the Eastern Orthodox, why don’t they take a first step and replace all statues with icons. Catholics know that Orthodox have a problem with statues as being perceived as a 3D violation of the prohibition against graven images, and it would be an easy thing to require icons in Churches and prohibit the use of statues in Catholic Churches?

 

[CapIV]

Yes, if the Roman Catholic Church would agree to compromise and change its teachins on a few points, there would be reunion very quickly. For examples of a few teachings that would have to change in order that the reunion would take place:

1. the doctrine of papal infallibility.
2. the Pope with administrative control over all bishops, including those of the East.
3. the Pope as not subject to a council of bishops.
4. the filioque
5. purgatory
6. indulgences
7. the “immaculate conception.”
8. original sin
9. baptism by sprinkling and not triple immersion.
10. Christians are not married by a priest, but by each other.
11. unleavened bread used for the Eucharist
12. use of statues (violation of prohibition against graven images).
13. denial of need for epiclesis in the Eucharist
14. celibacy for priests
15. development of doctrine.
16. separating the Mystery of Chrismation from the Mystery of Baptism.
17. juridical and legalistic view of salvation
18. Halloween Masses, clown Masses, Dracula Masses, balloon Masses, Chinese dragon Masses, coming out Masses, charismatic Masses, etc.
19. Organ music, guitar music, and other instrumental music played during the liturgy
20. fasting of only one hour before receiving Holy Communion
21. Communion Services conducted by female ministers
22. Catholics do not recognize St. Photius as a Saint.
23. Method of calculating date for Easter
24. Acquiring an Orthodox phronema
25. Incorrect method of making the sign of the cross.
26. And there are a few others which I will leave for later on.

lol this will never happen. And some of these aren’t even issues, but instead the product of some sort of misunderstanding you have of Catholic teaching. And the day the Church makes some of these absurd concessions is the day it ceases to be Catholic.

 

[CapIV]

Metropolitan Kallistos says “the problem is more in the area of semantics and different emphases than in any basic doctrinal differences”.

And by the way, at the Council of Florence, hardly any time was spent on Papal Primacy, because there was little to no disagreement.