The Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hesychios
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Hesychios

Guest
A slightly dated news blurb which may be of interest to some here…

ORTHODOX-CATHOLIC DIALOGUE ON CHURCH STRUCTURES CONTINUES

SCOBA

November 1, 2007

New York City - On-going dialogue on church structures continued at the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation Oct. 25-27. The dialogue marked the first of its meetings on the West Coast.

With the generous support of the Huffington Ecumenical Institute, the Consultation met on the campus of Loyola Marymount University (LMU) in Los Angeles, under the chairmanship of Metropolitan Maximos of Pittsburgh and Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk of Cincinnati. The Institute was established in 2005 to foster ecumenical relations between the Catholic and Orthodox communities.

On October 25, two Consultation members spoke at a public lecture on the LMU campus about two of the North American dialogue’s most important recent agreed statements. Father Alexander Golitzin of Marquette University spoke about the 1999 statement, “Baptism and ‘Sacramental Economy,’” and Jesuit Father Brian Daley of the University of Notre Dame reflected on the 2003 common text, “The Filioque: A Church-Dividing Issue?†On October 26 Archbishop Pilarczyk presided at a Mass in the LMU chapel. It was followed by a luncheon attended by LMU faculty and Michael Huffington.

The main focus of this seventy-third meeting of the Consultation was to synthesize the studies presented thus far on primacies and synodality in the two churches. For this purpose three Orthodox and three Catholic members gave brief presentations summarizing their understanding of the state of the question and an outline of how the churches might function in the event of the reestablishment of full communion. Orthodox papers included “Primacy in a United Church†by Prof. Paul Meyendorff, “An Orthodox Papacy: Primacy as Principatus†by Father Theodore Pulcini, and “What Exercise of Universal Primacy/Synodality Would be Possible?†by Father Robert Stephanopoulos. Catholic presentations included “Towards a Rapprochement with Orthodoxy: Exercises and Principles of Primacy/Synodality†by Sister Susan K. Wood, Ph.D, “The Reform of Deformed Churches†by Rev. Chorbishop John D. Faris, and “Universal Primacy/Synodality: Problem and Ur-Problem†by Vito Nicastro, Ph.D. Briefer reflections were offered by Father Daley, Father James Dutko, and Paulist Father Ronald Roberson.

As usual, one session of the meeting was devoted to an exchange of information about major events in the lives of the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Items discussed included the visit of the Archbishop of Cyprus to Rome, the death of Patriarch Teoctist of Romania and the election of his successor, the meeting of the international Orthodox-Catholic dialogue in Ravenna, developments in the Orthodox Church in America, the Motu Proprio of Pope Benedict XVI on “The Roman Liturgy Prior to the Reform of 1970,†the document of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church,†and the recent pilgrimage to Rome, Constantinople and St. Petersburg led by Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley and Metropolitan Methodios of Boston.

{continued below}
 
{continued from above}

The next meeting of the Consultation is scheduled to take place June 2-4, at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Brookline, Massachusetts.

In addition to the two co-chairs, the other Orthodox members of the Consultation include Father Thomas FitzGerald (Secretary), Father Nicholas Apostola, Prof. Susan Ashbrook Harvey, Father Dutko, Prof. Meyendorff, Father Golitzin, Dr. Robert Haddad, Father Paul Schnierla, Father Stephanopoulos, Dr. John Barnet, Rev Dr Theodore Pulcini, and Father Mark Arey, General Secretary of SCOBA (staff). The additional Catholic members are Father Daley (Secretary), Prof. Thomas Bird, Holy Cross Father Lucien Coutu, Father Peter Galadza, Chorbishop Faris, Father John Galvin, Father Sidney Griffith, ST, Father Joseph Komonchak, Father Paul McPartlan, Father David Petras, Sister Susan K. Wood, Prof. Nicastro, and Father Roberson, who serves as staff.

The North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation is sponsored jointly by the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas (SCOBA), the Bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), and the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops. Since its establishment in 1965, the Consultation has issued 22 agreed statements on various topics. All these texts are now available on the website of the SCOBA at scoba.us/resources/orthodox-catholic.html and on the USCCB website at
usccb.org/seia/orthodox_index.shtml


Note, this is not the highly publicized series of talks in Freising, Balamand, Belgrade and Ravenna, but another series entirely with different participants. I am particularly interested in how non-Catholics might view these talks.

Any comments?

Michael
 
I’m being chrismated into the Orthodox Church in about two weeks (sooner than I first expected). It’s interesting to read the the joint statement on economy, especially in regard to the sacraments. Not exactly related to your post, I know, but just thought I’d comment.
 
I’m being chrismated into the Orthodox Church in about two weeks (sooner than I first expected). It’s interesting to read the the joint statement on economy, especially in regard to the sacraments. Not exactly related to your post, I know, but just thought I’d comment.
Its not totally unrelated, your second chrismation.

If you were Ukrainian Catholic in Canada, you would be received into the UOC via simple confession and recitation of the creed.

Other places, you would be baptized.

Where you are going, you just are recieving a second confirmation.

In a real way, it is pertinent to the Orthodox-Catholic discussions.

Good luck.
 
I’m being chrismated into the Orthodox Church in about two weeks (sooner than I first expected). It’s interesting to read the the joint statement on economy, especially in regard to the sacraments. Not exactly related to your post, I know, but just thought I’d comment.
What a nice thing to start the New Year with! A New Life!!

May God bless you with many years!

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius:cool:
 
Originally Posted by ASimpleSinner:
Its not totally unrelated, your second chrismation.
The whole issue of baptism/chrismation amongst the RC, the EO and the OO is very confusing, as you well know. Historically, the Roman Catholic Church at times would baptize Eastern Orthodox. E.g. the Ustashi working hand in hand with the Catholic hierarchy to convert Serbs.

If I were a high-church Anglican coming to the Orthodox Church, would you say the same thing–that is, a second chrismation?
 
The whole issue of baptism/chrismation amongst the RC, the EO and the OO is very confusing, as you well know. Historically, the Roman Catholic Church at times would baptize Eastern Orthodox. E.g. the Ustashi working hand in hand with the Catholic hierarchy to convert Serbs.

If I were a high-church Anglican coming to the Orthodox Church, would you say the same thing–that is, a second chrismation?
A two-for-oner today!

Using the Ustashi for a talking point - a much beloved tactic in some circles - to point to anything but the failed fascist state’s attempt to hijack the Catholic faith with their nationaislm is beyond ridiculous. It is a red herring. It is as ridiculous as suggesting that stealing Greek Catholic churches in Ukraine and effecting gun point conversions a la Patriarch Aleksy I is the modus operendi of Orthodoxy.

As for Anglicans, no, why would I? A priest is needed for chrismation. Full stop.

(Something they don’t have. The BCP form was changed beyond what was used in the east or the west and oil is needed for chrismation, that is something they don’t even use in most circles. See here )

That comparison is a red herring. We don’t recognize their orders, Orthodoxy doesn’t either, that is another red herring.
 
Originally Posted by ASimpleSinner:
A two-for-oner today!
Using the Ustashi for a talking point - a much beloved tactic in some circles - to point to anything but the failed fascist state’s attempt to hijack the Catholic faith with their nationaislm is beyond ridiculous. It is a red herring. It is as ridiculous as suggesting that stealing Greek Catholic churches in Ukraine and effecting gun point conversions a la Patriarch Aleksy I is the modus operendi of Orthodoxy.
As for Anglicans, no, why would I? A priest is needed for chrismation. Full stop.
(Something they don’t have. The BCP form was changed beyond what was used in the east or the west and oil is needed for chrismation, that is something they don’t even use in most circles. See here )
“anything but”? :rolleyes:

The Vatican maintained full ties with the Utashi government even amidst the mass murders and forced conversions. According to the U.S. Treasury Department, millions of dollars were being held in the Vatican Bank by the Ustashi for safekeeping. I do not think the innocence of the Catholic hierarchy can be so facilely maintained.

In any case, I never claimed this to be the modus operandi of Roman Catholicism. I specifically mentioned “at times” to this end. Maybe the Pope never said “Baptize those schismatics!” but the Pope is not the Roman Catholic Church.

It is not the modus operandi for Catholic and Orthodox to freely receive the sacraments from each other, but, as Louis Bouyer, O.P., among others, has indicated, such inter-communion is not uncommon in the history of the Church. I was simply pointing out an incident in the history of the Church when Catholics re-baptized (or “baptized”) Orthodox.

Priest needed? No problem. All Christians are priests (according to Protestant theology). 👍
That comparison is a red herring. We don’t recognize their orders, Orthodoxy doesn’t either, that is another red herring.
Your “red herring’s” are of no significance when based on a false premise.
 
Your “red herring’s” are of no significance when based on a false premise.
I would love for you in turn after throwing down such a provacative assessment to offer how my premise is false.

Do or do not Orthodox broadly reject Anglican orders?

What is the significance of your mentioning the Protestnatn misunderstandings of the "priesthood of all believers?

If you have adopted the school of thought in Orthodox theology that there is no valid prieshood in the Catholic church - one at odds with the school that allowed for the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox diocese to eneter communion with Orthodoxy en masses, not to mention the various Eastern Catholic churches in europe dragooned inot communion with the state-manipulated EO bodies - be open and honest and say “There are no valid sacraments in the Catholic Church”

Then, I suppose, be prepared to defend this thesis against the numerous examples of praxis contrary to your offering.

But Protestants - all be they high church with smells, bells, robes, gold and incense - are still just that, Protestants. Anglican orders - even when dealing with the very best dressed and “looking the part” Anglo-Catholic, are not recognized by Rome or any Orthodox body (save except some speculation from 100 years ago where it was offered how they MIGHT become valid, there is no precedent for recieving their priests by vesting as there have been with Catholics and Oriental Orthodox…)

So no, I would not say an Anglo-Catholic who is chrismated is chrismated a second time. Neither would the Orthodox.
 
Originally Posted by ASimpleSinner:
I would love for you in turn after throwing down such a provacative assessment to offer how my premise is false.
You pinned me with claiming that what the Utashi did in converting Serbs is the modus operandi of Roman Catholicism. I did no such thing. I was only pointing out an example, not necessarily the norm.
Do or do not Orthodox broadly reject Anglican orders?
Only recently, yes. But Anglicans have bishops nonetheless. The Anglicans may see themselves as having Apostolic Succession and valid orders, but Orthodox and Catholics reject this. Orthodox see both Anglicans and Catholics as heretical in their beliefs.
What is the significance of your mentioning the Protestnatn misunderstandings of the "priesthood of all believers?
I was pointing to the importance of theological perspective. Orthodox will not see my chrismation as a “second chrismation” because the first chrismation is not in itself considered grace-bearing, according to Orthodox theology. RC consider Anglican chrismation as of no value because, as you mention, Anglicans do not have valid orders. So, from an RC perspective, a chrismated Anglican who decides to become Orthodox is only truly being chrismated when admitted into the Orthodox Church.
If you have adopted the school of thought in Orthodox theology that there is no valid prieshood in the Catholic church - one at odds with the school that allowed for the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox diocese to eneter communion with Orthodoxy en masses, not to mention the various Eastern Catholic churches in europe dragooned inot communion with the state-manipulated EO bodies - be open and honest and say “There are no valid sacraments in the Catholic Church”
Economia.
Then, I suppose, be prepared to defend this thesis against the numerous examples of praxis contrary to your offering.
This is not the place to defend a doctoral thesis. 🙂
But Protestants - all be they high church with smells, bells, robes, gold and incense - are still just that, Protestants. Anglican orders - even when dealing with the very best dressed and “looking the part” Anglo-Catholic, are not recognized by Rome or any Orthodox body (save except some speculation from 100 years ago where it was offered how they MIGHT become valid, there is no precedent for recieving their priests by vesting as there have been with Catholics and Oriental Orthodox…)
This is how I feel towards Rome: all the smells and bells, traditions, high-sounding theology, beautiful artwork, mystical writers, logical arguments, crucifixes, Thomistic theology – even after all this, Christ Himself is missing.
So no, I would not say an Anglo-Catholic who is chrismated is chrismated a second time. Neither would the Orthodox.
Correct.
 
“anything but”? :rolleyes:

The Vatican maintained full ties with the Utashi government even amidst the mass murders and forced conversions. According to the U.S. Treasury Department, millions of dollars were being held in the Vatican Bank by the Ustashi for safekeeping. I do not think the innocence of the Catholic hierarchy can be so facilely maintained.

In any case, I never claimed this to be the modus operandi of Roman Catholicism. I specifically mentioned “at times” to this end. Maybe the Pope never said “Baptize those schismatics!” but the Pope is not the Roman Catholic Church.
Yes, anything but.
  • "The Vatican maintained full ties with the Utashi government even amidst the mass murders and forced conversions. " That as the case may be, this error or rebaptism isn’t confirmed in a “guilt through association fashion” by maintained ties.
  • “According to the U.S. Treasury Department, millions of dollars were being held in the Vatican Bank by the Ustashi for safekeeping.” All the drachma, dubloons, dollars, yen or scheckels in the world in the Vatican bank (while having a nicely ominous ring to it) does not confirm or lend support to the idea that this abuse was in turn tacitly accepted. “They took Ustaschi money, they must think rebaptism is accetable”?
  • " I do not think the innocence of the Catholic hierarchy can be so facilely maintained." That innocence, one way or another is a non issue in the matter of rebaptism. Turning to this sad chapter in history and its abuse doesn’t confirm the abuse - it confirms how sad the abuse was. Rather like pograms in imperial Russia don’t demonstrate or speak to the ROC’s policy on evangelizing Jews.
  • “The Pope is not the Catholic Church.” Fair enough. The isolated abuses that pepper history, I in turn offer, are not then to be broadly painted or understood to be evidence of alternative acceptable theological options. They were wrong. Money in the bank or not.
 
This is how I feel towards Rome: all the smells and bells, traditions, high-sounding theology, beautiful artwork, mystical writers, logical arguments, crucifixes, Thomistic theology – even after all this, Christ Himself is missing.
Now we are getting somewhere.

To come out and be plain about it - that you are of the thinking Jesus Christ himself is missing in the Catholic Church - is far more honest than I have seen others offer their mental reservations. For this much honesty, I am grateful.

As to Economia… Such amazing sacramental power that entails - to do, undo or make up for that which is lacking at the discretion of the local ordinary. Would that the Latins not be chained by their “Scholasticism” (a term uttered with eye rolling contempt so much of the time on here and other fora that Easterners participate in. For all the pontifications on Western Scholastic error, I am not sure I have met all that many pontificators who are familiar actually with scholasticims, I digress)…

No for all the power of economia - a term that means so much to so many it seems to have no definition that fits - well about such power, sadly, it seems the Roman pontiff can only dream.
 
Originally Posted by ASimpleSinner:
Yes, anything but.
  • "The Vatican maintained full ties with the Utashi government even amidst the mass murders and forced conversions. " That as the case may be, this error or rebaptism isn’t confirmed in a “guilt through association fashion” by maintained ties.
  • “According to the U.S. Treasury Department, millions of dollars were being held in the Vatican Bank by the Ustashi for safekeeping.” All the drachma, dubloons, dollars, yen or scheckels in the world in the Vatican bank (while having a nicely ominous ring to it) does not confirm or lend support to the idea that this abuse was in turn tacitly accepted. “They took Ustaschi money, they must think rebaptism is accetable”?
  • " I do not think the innocence of the Catholic hierarchy can be so facilely maintained." That innocence, one way or another is a non issue in the matter of rebaptism. Turning to this sad chapter in history and its abuse doesn’t confirm the abuse - it confirms how sad the abuse was. Rather like pograms in imperial Russia don’t demonstrate or speak to the ROC’s policy on evangelizing Jews.
  • “The Pope is not the Catholic Church.” Fair enough. The isolated abuses that pepper history, I in turn offer, are not then to be broadly painted or understood to be evidence of alternative acceptable theological options. They were wrong. Money in the bank or not.
The innocence of the Catholic hierarchy, especially the Croatian hierarchy, is not non-issue, especially if the Catholic hierarchy acquiesced in the baptisms of their hereditary enemies, the Serbs–performed by Catholic chaplains provided the Ustashi by the Catholic hierarchy. If the Catholic hierarchy did agree to the baptisms of Orthodox, I imagine that it was more out of spite than in the genuine theological concern that they must be baptized to become Catholic. So yes, an abuse, but nonetheless a reality.

I never claimed that the baptisms were a viable theological option for the Roman Catholic Church. I was simply pointing out that such has occurred in the Church, much as forgiveness of sins has been sold (think Tetzel), contrary to the guidelines laying out what constitutes an indulgence and what it entails.

I don’t claim to know everything about the abuses. I wasn’t there. Were you?
 
As to Economia… Such amazing sacramental power that entails - to do, undo or make up for that which is lacking at the discretion of the local ordinary. Would that the Latins not be chained by their “Scholasticism” (a term uttered with eye rolling contempt so much of the time on here and other fora that Easterners participate in. For all the pontifications on Western Scholastic error, I am not sure I have met all that many pontificators who are familiar actually with scholasticims, I digress)…
Ok.
No for all the power of economia - a term that means so much to so many it seems to have no definition that fits - well about such power, sadly, it seems the Roman pontiff can only dream.
Let him dream.
 
my, haven’t we started the New Year nicely.:eek: I’m going to refrain from jumping in.

Btw. Patriarch Pavle forbad baptism of Bosnians (I don’t know Croatians) except by special dispensation: he didn’t want the Church to be used. He also issued a blanket excommunication for those involved in atrocities, and I seem to remember defrocked a few priests who acted as chaplains for the militias.
 
Originally Posted by Isa Almisry:
my, haven’t we started the New Year nicely.:eek: I’m going to refrain from jumping in.
Hey, get it right: it’s The Circumcision of Our Lord. 😃

Things are meant to be sharp and painful today. 🙂
 
Hi Madaglan,

Would to say right on, and great having you on board with us…

I to was a convert to Eastern Orthodoxy. My back ground was Roman Catholic and I was drawn to the faith by hearing it on the radio in the mid-1980’s.

I was chrismation back in Jan. 7, 2001 by my priest Fr John. I was told that I would have to do it because the way the RC Baptize me. I was told it was lacking and I need to receive my chrismation to fill in the blanks if you know what I mean.

So I just want to say great and congred’s on your chrismation.

GOD bless you.
 
Originally Posted by Frank J:
Hi Madaglan,
Would to say right on, and great having you on board with us…
I to was a convert to Eastern Orthodoxy. My back ground was Roman Catholic and I was drawn to the faith by hearing it on the radio in the mid-1980’s.
I was chrismation back in Jan. 7, 2001 by my priest Fr John. I was told that I would have to do it because the way the RC Baptize me. I was told it was lacking and I need to receive my chrismation to fill in the blanks if you know what I mean.
So I just want to say great and congred’s on your chrismation.
GOD bless you.
Hey Frank. Thanks for your comments. That’s interesting you were drawn to the faith through the radio. Is the radio station still around?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top