What about a new Ecumenical Council?

[DeepeningFaith]

But this time, Roman Catholics, Eastern Catholics, and all Orthodox would be involved!!!

Let’s stop with the joint commissions and meet and hash out the issues and talk.

Goals:
Recognize apostolic succession of all
Come to an understanding of the difference between dogma and doctrine and what the differences of doctrine can be allowed without claiming heresy or schism.
Filioque
Primacy
UNIFICATION!!!

We can figure out territory issues later, or then.

I’d expect this to be like an old-school council that lasts 5 years and meets 2-3 times each year.
We could do it in Nicea (although not really an option since it’s Turkey!) We could do it at the Vatican since it is free from any country’s authority and the only authority is God. I know this seems naive, but everyone keeps talking about meeting between Patriarchs and such, why not just go for it?!

Thoughts?

 

[Alexius]

I unfortunately have to say that this is simply not possible at this point in time, IMO of course. For one, there are so many internal issues that have yet to be resolved such as between the Moscow and Constantinople patriarchates regarding territory. Though this issue in particular may seem like a non-issue, I do not feel that [most] representatives of either patriarchate would even sit in the same room together without having fixed this problem. In that regard, no truly binding agreements could be hatched out as not all of Orthodoxy would even be in attendance and therefore not be in agreement. In essence, it would be similar to Florence.

One significance of Florence is that it taught us that since the followers of the Byzantine churches did not accept the decisions of the hierarches, there could be no unification or even significance to any of the decisions except in the history books. This is not meant as an attack at all, I am simply stating what I believe the reality to be based on Eastern history.

Another thing we learned at Florence is that rushing into union due to political pressure and/or instability is not something that results in much fruit (perhaps some rotten fruit in many minds). This is perhaps one reason why many were unwilling to recognize the union as not all accepted the decisions that were made.

I believe that the stage we are at now is one focused most of all on coming together to change the secular atmosphere of Europe and re-evangelize it. As we move closer with that goal and as we continue to find agreement on many aspects of moral theology, we can then approach more sensitive issues like ecclesiology. Going all-out in an effort to unify without the true internal unity of both clerics and lay persons can only result in more tension. We are running a good race, may we reach the mark…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[FirstCalled]

That would be something. Write the Pope, see if he can set something up.

 

[ProVobis]

Trent 2?

 

[Hesychios]

But this time, Roman Catholics, Eastern Catholics, and all Orthodox would be involved!!!

Let’s stop with the joint commissions and meet and hash out the issues and talk.

…

Thoughts?

Well, one problem is that the Roman Catholic church is not really conciliar. It’s bishops, even after taking into consideration of all the complaints about them we read here, are not their own men like the bishops of old.

They are beholding to the Pope. He hires them, and he fires them. He can transfer them around, he can force them to retire and he can name their replacements. And for the most part they accept this, they have been vetted for that attitude before they ever became candidates for the mitre, they were mostly ultramontanists when they were young priests being considered. Everyone knows this.

And there are so darned many of them.

The council would be stacked. If every decision were to be based on a simple majority vote of the attendees, *even if the bishop of Rome were to promise to abide by their decisions, *the chances of having a balanced discussion on the topics at hand (and a fair and balanced agreement) is next to impossible to assure.

The only kind of union we will ever possibly see (and Catholics will have to get used to this idea) is one where the Papal Catholic church will be one of several self governed churches in communion with one another.

Even that is not very likely in our lifetimes. The Papacy will not accept the concept that other churches could be validly self governing, it is antithetical to the very basis of Papal authority.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Well, one problem is that the Roman Catholic church is not really conciliar. It’s bishops, even after taking into consideration of all the complaints about them we read here, are not their own men like the bishops of old.

They are beholding to the Pope. He hires them, and he fires them. He can transfer them around, he can force them to retire and he can name their replacements. And for the most part they accept this, they have been vetted for that attitude before they ever became candidates for the mitre, they were mostly ultramontanists when they were young priests being considered. Everyone knows this.

And there are so darned many of them.

The council would be stacked. If every decision were to be based on a simple majority vote of the attendees, *even if the bishop of Rome were to promise to abide by their decisions, *the chances of having a balanced discussion on the topics at hand (and a fair and balanced agreement) is next to impossible to assure.

The only kind of union we will ever possibly see (and Catholics will have to get used to this idea) is one where the Papal Catholic church will be one of several self governed churches in communion with one another.

Even that is not very likely in our lifetimes. The Papacy will not accept the concept that other churches could be validly self governing, it is antithetical to the very basis of Papal authority.

I’m a Latin Catholic and I have to agree with every word you said brother Hesychios.

I will now wait for my letter of excommunication to come through the post.

 

[Cetil]

But this time, Roman Catholics, Eastern Catholics, and all Orthodox would be involved!!!

Let’s stop with the joint commissions and meet and hash out the issues and talk.

Goals:
Recognize apostolic succession of all
Come to an understanding of the difference between dogma and doctrine and what the differences of doctrine can be allowed without claiming heresy or schism.
Filioque
Primacy
UNIFICATION!!!

We can figure out territory issues later, or then.

I’d expect this to be like an old-school council that lasts 5 years and meets 2-3 times each year.
We could do it in Nicea (although not really an option since it’s Turkey!) We could do it at the Vatican since it is free from any country’s authority and the only authority is God. I know this seems naive, but everyone keeps talking about meeting between Patriarchs and such, why not just go for it?!

Thoughts?

The purpose of the joint commissions is to hash out the issues and talk. Such a council would have to have its authority accepted in advance and I don’t see all the parties prepared to do that. And we are still a long way from agreement on the primacy and other things. It isn’t going to happen.
Besides, ecumenical councils seldom settle issues. Each period after a Council has usually been followed by a period of turmoil such as we are having now in the post Vatican II era. We are not ready for it.

C.

 

[mardukm]

But this time, Roman Catholics, Eastern Catholics, and all Orthodox would be involved!!!

Let’s stop with the joint commissions and meet and hash out the issues and talk.

At this time, it does not seem possible. The general mien of EO’xy is that it’s the Greek way or no way at all. All other Churches would likely loose their unique Traditions if EO’xy had its way. Thank God for the Catholic Church.

Blessings

 

[mardukm]

I will now wait for my letter of excommunication to come through the post.

Why?

Blessings

 

[dvdjs]

I’m a Latin Catholic and I have to agree with every word you said brother Hesychios. I will now wait for my letter of excommunication to come through the post.

An obvious point of disagreement is this:

Well, one problem is that the Roman Catholic church is not really conciliar. It’s bishops, even after taking into consideration of all the complaints about them we read here, are not their own men like the bishops of old.

Not entirely sure what exactly is meant by this remark, but on face value it seems like typical historical fiction that somehow imagines an ostensibly idealized ecclesiology (and imagines it as an invariant of the EO church), while in reality it is neither characteristic “of old” or much of any time. Even today: how are EO bishops their “own men”? Ask the Antiochian Orthodox “bishops” of North America.

 

[WetCatechumen]

At this time, it does not seem possible. The general mien of EO’xy is that it’s the Greek way or no way at all. All other Churches would likely loose their unique Traditions if EO’xy had its way. Thank God for the Catholic Church.

Blessings

It’s the way it’s been for much of history.

The Latin Romans insisted upon the Latin way, and the Greek Romans insisted upon the Greek way.

I admire the Oriental Orthodox for be able to maintain such a diverse communion of liturgical traditions, as well as stay in union with each other.