Too Much Ecumenism?

[Jon_Mallory]

There are a number of points being made in this thread that are errors in fact.

The decision about who may receive sacraments from a Catholic minister is decided by the Catholic Church…not by non-Catholics. This is articulated in Canon 844.

Thus, I have had numerous occasions to administer the sacraments not only to those in paragraph 3
§3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.
I have also had occasion to do so, as a hospital chaplain, to do so using paragraph 4
§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.
Paragraph 2 is not an invitation to non-Catholic priests of the East to violate the canons of their hierarchies which govern them…rather, it is addressed to Catholics telling them that there is not an impediment from our perspective, from Rome, provided these norms apply.

Of course the Catholic faithful should not do so when it violates the norms of the other Church.
§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.
However, there are non-Catholic Churches in the East, and non-Catholic bishops and priests, that have allowed this to happen and have administered these sacraments to Catholics.

The prohibition in the many different non-Catholic Churches of the East is not as rigid or unilateral as it is being portrayed here.

Thank you for the insight. It is great to have someone theologically trained who understands the meaning of the canons that is a little more nuanced than the average reader realizes. What jurisdictions are more lax with intercommunion with Rome? FYI, I am within the Antiochian jurisdiction and am a new convert (still learning).

 

[babochka]

Thank you for the insight. It is great to have someone theologically trained who understands the meaning of the canons that is a little more nuanced than the average reader realizes. What jurisdictions are more lax with intercommunion with Rome? FYI, I am within the Antiochian jurisdiction and am a new convert (still learning).

It isn’t so much that particular jurisdictions are more, or less, lax, it is that in certain times and places, under extreme circumstances, intercommunion has been practiced approved informally by the bishops involved. This is particularly true in the Middle East, among Melkite Catholics and those in your own Antiochian Orthodox Church. There have also been agreements in place for pastoral care of Catholics in Orthodox parishes (and vice versa) between Catholics and the Armenian Orthodox bishops.

Extreme circumstances call for extreme provisions.

In the US, particularly the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic, the Antiochian Orthodox, the Melkite Catholics, and the Syriac Orthodox and Catholics were pretty accepting of informal intermingling liturgically, including reception of the Mysteries in counterpart Churches. Family dispersal among the various ecclesia was a major driving force in this regard. It was pretty much a matter of routine until about the early to mid-1980s, when the Antiochians began to step back from the practice, something that came about as the Antiochian numbers started to be bolstered by an influx of non-Arabs to their ranks.

There are formal agreements between the Catholic Church and the Syro-Malankara Church, as well as between the Church of the East and the Chaldean Catholic Church, to allow intercommunion in some circumstances.

Most agreements are informal in nature, and due to particular circumstances that need to be addressed.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Thank you for the insight. It is great to have someone theologically trained who understands the meaning of the canons that is a little more nuanced than the average reader realizes. What jurisdictions are more lax with intercommunion with Rome? FYI, I am within the Antiochian jurisdiction and am a new convert (still learning).

The word “lax” would be pejorative and is frankly not appropriate.

The experiences which I referenced dealt above all with pastoral responses to individual situations within Europe in the span of my lifetime and that of my parents; these pastoral responses and adjustments derived from what was lived on the continent in the course of the 20th century.

 

[poche]

That doesn’t mean it should happen. It is tempting, especially in this era, to think there is one Church but many different “denominations” of that Church. Differences aside, we all profess to be Christians and have some kind of trinitarian theology so why shouldn’t we all be one Church? I hope the Orthodox Church and the RCC will become one someday but right now, they are not. Communion between the two can only happen when we share the same faith–the faith of St. Peter. The Orthodox and Catholics disagree on what constitutes that faith. Permitting intercommunion between the two only confuses well meaning people into thinking we share the one Faith of St. Peter. Honest dialogue needs to continue and much work needs to be done on both sides before we can share the one Cup.

The real priority has to be the salvation of souls.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

The word “lax” would be pejorative and is frankly not appropriate.

The experiences which I referenced dealt above all with pastoral responses to individual situations within Europe in the span of my lifetime and that of my parents; these pastoral responses and adjustments derived from what was lived on the continent in the course of the 20th century.

Whoa…wasn’t trying to needle anyone. My apologies.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

The real priority has to be the salvation of souls.

And Salvation has nothing to do with the faith of St. Peter?

 

[twf]

The word “lax” would be pejorative and is frankly not appropriate.

The experiences which I referenced dealt above all with pastoral responses to individual situations within Europe in the span of my lifetime and that of my parents; these pastoral responses and adjustments derived from what was lived on the continent in the course of the 20th century.

It would shock some of our Orthodox brethren on this forum (and some Catholics as well), but I can testify that Antiochian Orthodox Christians were regularly communing at the local Melkite Greek Catholic mission 5-10 years ago. As the late pastor (a priest who has since gone to his reward - who incidentally served both the Melkite Eparchy as pastor and the Latin Archdiocese as prison chaplain) explained, he served the only Arabic language Byzantine Divine Liturgy in the region. For the Antiochian Orthodox who communed there, this Catholic mission was more of a home than say a Ukrainian or Russian Orthodox parish.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

It would shock some of our Orthodox brethren on this forum (and some Catholics as well), but I can testify that Antiochian Orthodox Christians were regularly communing at the local Melkite Greek Catholic mission 5-10 years ago. As the late pastor (a priest who has since gone to his reward - who incidentally served both the Melkite Eparchy as pastor and the Latin Archdiocese as prison chaplain) explained, he served the only Arabic language Byzantine Divine Liturgy in the region. For the Antiochian Orthodox who communed there, this Catholic mission was more of a home than say a Ukrainian or Russian Orthodox parish.

It makes sense. Not all Orthodox bishops take care of their people as they ought.

 

[camkutz]

Probably going to be an unpopular opinion with many people but for me…

I think ecumenism is right… to an extent. We should be focused on the conversion of sinners for the salvation of souls, that should be in effect our main concern on earth as well as the care of our own soul. Ecumenism is the goal to unite all Christian Churches, a dream for everyone I’m sure

We should try our best to unite all Churches back to the Communion of St.Peter to make the Church whole again however I disagree when ecumenism gets a bit…too far for example this is the unpopular piece when the Holy Father is celebrating vespers with the Archbishop of Canterbury (this is a non-sacramental prayer service, so fair it’s not a big deal) but when the Anglican clergyman wears his episcopal regalia and stands next to the Pope to give his blessing when his holy orders are non-existent, or when the Pope has asked for his blessing - it’s an act of humility I’m sure but it’s where for me I feel uncomfortable.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is a minister and spiritual leader for the Anglicans but in no way is he a bishop recognized by the Catholic Church.

And don’t get me wrong please, the Anglican-Catholic joint vespers with The AB of Canterbury and the Pope I found was a joyous occasion and made me feel warmth inside.

It just frustrates me a little that many people have died to preserve the Catholic faith during reformation periods and risked their lives to preach against heresy and say the Mass and I feel (you may not, this isn’t something to dispute) that they are undermined by many examples of “too much ecumenism”

Forgive me

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Probably going to be an unpopular opinion with many people but for me…

I think ecumenism is right… to an extent. We should be focused on the conversion of sinners for the salvation of souls, that should be in effect our main concern on earth as well as the care of our own soul. Ecumenism is the goal to unite all Christian Churches, a dream for everyone I’m sure

We should try our best to unite all Churches back to the Communion of St.Peter to make the Church whole again however I disagree when ecumenism gets a bit…too far for example this is the unpopular piece when the Holy Father is celebrating vespers with the Archbishop of Canterbury (this is a non-sacramental prayer service, so fair it’s not a big deal) but when the Anglican clergyman wears his episcopal regalia and stands next to the Pope to give his blessing when his holy orders are non-existent, or when the Pope has asked for his blessing - it’s an act of humility I’m sure but it’s where for me I feel uncomfortable.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is a minister and spiritual leader for the Anglicans but in no way is he a bishop recognized by the Catholic Church.

And don’t get me wrong please, the Anglican-Catholic joint vespers with The AB of Canterbury and the Pope I found was a joyous occasion and made me feel warmth inside.

It just frustrates me a little that many people have died to preserve the Catholic faith during reformation periods and risked their lives to preach against heresy and say the Mass and I feel (you may not, this isn’t something to dispute) that they are undermined by many examples of “too much ecumenism”

Forgive me

But you have not stated the Catholic position.

You are correct that there is a determination, by the Church of Rome, that there is/has been a loss of apostolic succession in various Communities…which is why they are not formally referred to as Churches.

The Church of Rome has also said
*Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ.

The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.

It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.*
Thus it is not “humility” that prompts the Holy Father to ask the Archbishop of Canterbury to bless him. It is to acknowledge that the constituent elements of the Anglican Communion “have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.” And indeed we recognise that the Holy Spirit is at work in them in such ways that, because of their lives of faith, they have even given the supreme witness to Christ and His Church as martyrs.

Of course, there cannot be a joint celebration of the Eucharist – but you mischaracterise what happened. The Pope and the Primate of the Church of England co-presided at the liturgy, which was not a Eucharist but was a liturgy, at which they jointly imparted the blessing.

Indeed, according to the complementary norms in Anglicanorum Coetibus, when a bishop of the Anglican Communion petitions to be received into full communion with Rome and is ordained, he is to be granted the use of thepontificalia he brought with him even if his ordination by a Catholic bishop is as presbyter – and he is, moreover, to be accorded a seat in the conference of bishops – because of the dignity he held in the Anglican Communion.

As for how we view the Archbishop of Canterbury, this is not some sort of pretence or charade.

The Holy Father expressed it quite well in his message to His Grace in March 2013

MESSAGE OF POPE FRANCIS
TO THE MOST REVEREND AND RIGHT HONOURABLE JUSTIN WELBY
ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
ON THE OCCASION OF THE CEREMONY OF ENTHRONEMENT

*To the Most Reverend and Right Honourable
Justin Welby
Archbishop of Canterbury

“May grace and peace be multiplied to you” (1 Pet 1:2b)

I thank you for the kind words contained in your message to me at my election, and I wish in turn to offer my greetings and best wishes on the occasion of your Enthronement at Canterbury Cathedral.

The pastoral ministry is a call to walk in fidelity to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Please be assured of my prayers as you take up your new responsibilities, and I ask you to pray for me as I respond to the new call that the Lord has addressed to me.

I look forward to meeting you in the near future, and to continuing the warm fraternal relations that our predecessors enjoyed.

From the Vatican, 18 March 2013

FRANCIS*

 

[TK421]

I was reading a book called the Four Witnesses about 4 early church fathers. One was St. Ignatius of Antioch. He wrote many letters while on his journey to be executed by the Romans. One such letter was the the Church at Philadelphia. There are a couple of quotes that are eye openers.

That is an absolute statement made by a saint who was trained directly by St. John the Apostle. Pretty strong huh? That was in Chapter 3.

Another quote:

Talks about the primacy of the Eucharist in Chapter 4.

Now I know that we should be happy if more people followed Christ. But those are pretty strong words that make it seem that we may have gotten carried away with all the ecumenical stuff. It may be leading to a misunderstanding for those who leave the Mother Church over music, or boring homilies et al.

What do you think?

The early fathers had an intense love for God and can be a wellspring of wisdom and spiritual growth for those that read them, but all that being said, it is not the belief of the Catholic Church that happening to be born closer to “the source” (the Gospels) is a default to having more authority. St John the Evangelist as a 1st century man raised in the Roman world, a bishop, and a laborer in the vineyard of the Lord, would have shared St Ignatius’ view, but even this doesn’t mean anything in terms of authority (apart from what was written as Sacred texts that were eventually confirmed a few centuries later). The people in the time of the early Church were as human as any other generation. In fact, doctrines develop and become more refined over time as the Church "matures’ through the various rigors and trials of history. She has experienced the Roman persecutions, the Councils, the pseudo-anarchy of the Dark Ages, the dangerous wealth & pride of the High Middle Ages, the revolution & rebellion of the Reformation and the Enlightenment, the brutality of the modern period, and the complacency & relativity of the current postmodern world. These trials - generally speaking - suggest that the current Church is superior in wisdom & depth to the early Church, and likewise, that the Church several centuries from now will be superior in maturity to the present one. Human beings mature through life, and the Church as a mystical body matures through her own life over the millenniums, while always retaining who she is.

Besides, there is nothing heretical about what St Ignatius is saying in terms of the Church having - exclusively having - both reliable sacraments as channels of grace, and of full communion with the Chair of Peter, though you are correct the contemporary Church does not have the more linear thinking of the early Catholic Christians.

 

[Contarini]

And Salvation has nothing to do with the faith of St. Peter?

The faith of St. Peter was faith in Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God.

That’s not peculiar to Christians in communion with Rome.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Now I know that we should be happy if more people followed Christ. But those are pretty strong words that make it seem that we may have gotten carried away with all the ecumenical stuff. It may be leading to a misunderstanding for those who leave the Mother Church over music, or boring homilies et al.

I think that if you think that people are leaving the Church because the Church isn’t insisting on its prerogatives strenuously enough, then you haven’t talked to most of the ex-Catholics I’ve talked to.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

I think the more important question is whether ecumenism actually works, the more we change to resemble protestants the less of a reason they have to end the western schism.

If we give validity to them, why would they ever be interested in joining? What would be the point?

This way of putting it allows me to use an argument more often used by folks on your side of the spectrum (i.e., those worried about excessive ecumenism): truth is more important than consequences.

Ecumenism is not about manipulating people into doing something, though of course one hopes good results will follow. It’s about recognizing truth. Similarly with the assertion of the unique status of the Catholic Church–it’s about proclaiming truth.

Both truths must be insisted on. Truth is paradoxical.

I’m sure there are people who would be more likely to become Catholic the more the Church insisted on its uniqueness. I myself might have reconsidered my decision to drop out of RCIA in 1999 if the local RCIA team had spoken sternly to me about walking away from the true Church. But there are many, many other people who are driven away from Catholicism by what they see as the Church’s arrogance and exclusivity.

Of course, that’s your cue to say “truth is more important than consequences.”
And I say, “exactly.” So let’s tell the whole truth to the best of our ability.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

It just frustrates me a little that many people have died to preserve the Catholic faith during reformation periods and risked their lives to preach against heresy and say the Mass and I feel (you may not, this isn’t something to dispute) that they are undermined by many examples of “too much ecumenism”

Forgive me

Lots of people on the Protestant side feel that way too. In England, especially, both sides had their martyrs.

I was very struck by C. S. Lewis’ statement, which I read as a teenager, that both St. Thomas More and William Tyndale impressed him as two of the holiest men of their time.

One of the reasons I’ve stayed Anglican so long is my desire to honor both of them.

I have no intention of ceasing to honor William Tyndale and other Protestant martyrs as a Catholic.

People died for their faith on both sides. They died for love of Jesus. The fact that people on both sides died for love of Jesus ought to be a reason for us to seek unity, not a reason for us to remain divided. Because, whether they recognized it at the time or not, they were dying for the same Jesus.

Edwin

 

[TK421]

Yes, it is important to understand that the ecumenism of the Vatican II is not a cheap sales pitch to protestant and orthodox Christians. Like all Councils, its intent was the refinement of objective truth.

So, what the Council confirmed (and don’t doubt that it was around long prior to it) is that while we are demanded by logic to acknowledge the fundamental differences between the Church and other Christian groups, this doesn’t mean there needs to be needless division on where commonality does exist. So while we don’t share communion, there is no rational reasons why we can’t - for example - share in prayer and certain causes. We can do this even with the Muslim community, so we can do it with separated brethren as well.

 

[poche]

And Salvation has nothing to do with the faith of St. Peter?

It has everything to do with the Faith of St Peter. However Canon Law states that if the salvation of souls has the priority. This is the Canon Law that comes from the Faith of Peter. This is the reason for Jesus’ coming. This is the mission of the Church.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

We can do nothing greater than to love all our neighbours as we love ourselves, this is a form of ecumenism.