HISTORY OF CATHOLIC-ORTHODOX DIALOGUE by Father Christiaan Kappes plus MY COMMENTARY
15. Everyone also knows with what great love the Christians of the East celebrate the sacred liturgy, especially the eucharistic celebration, source of the Church’s life and pledge of future glory, in which the faithful, united with their bishop, have access to God the Father through the Son, the Word made flesh, Who suffered and has been glorified, and so, in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, they enter into communion with the most holy Trinity, being made “sharers of the divine nature”.(35) Hence, through the celebration of the Holy Eucharist in each of these churches, the Church of God is built up and grows in stature(36) and through concelebration, their communion with one another is made manifest.In this liturgical worship, the Christians of the East pay high tribute, in beautiful hymns of praise, to Mary ever Virgin, whom the ecumenical Council of Ephesus solemnly proclaimed to be the holy Mother of God, so that Christ might be acknowledged as being truly Son of God and Son of Man, according to the Scriptures. Many also are the saints whose praise they sing, among them the Fathers of the universal Church.These Churches, although separated from us, possess true sacraments, above all by apostolic succession, the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are linked with us in closest intimacy. Therefore some worship in common (communicatio in sacris), given suitable circumstances and the approval of Church authority, is not only possible but to be encouraged.
The Council went a decisive step further with the aid of the “subsistit in”. It wished to do justice to the fact that there are found outside of the Catholic Church not only individual Christians but also “elements of the church”,[11] indeed churches and ecclesial communities which, although not in full communion, rightly belong to the one church and possess salvatory significance for their members (LG, 8, 15; UR, 3; UUS, 10-14)
Understood in this sense “subsistit in” encompasses the essential thrust of the “est”. But it no longer formulates the self-concept [self-image] of the Catholic Church in “splendid isolation”, but also takes account of churches and ecclesial communities in which the one church of Jesus Christ is effectively present (UUS, 11), but which are not in full communion with it. In formulating its own identity, the Catholic Church at the same time establishes a relationship of dialogue with these churches and ecclesial communities.
…the separated communities have on occasion better developed individual aspects of the revealed truth, so that the Catholic Church, under the circumstances of division, is unable to fully accomplish its intrinsic catholicity [without them.] (UR, 4; UUS, 14).
- Firstly, to come to a more fully Catholic position on any subject, it is not enough to rely only on the Latin tradition, but to critically examine the traditions of other apostolic churches. This is evident in the Vatican II ecclesiology and in the liturgy that came from it which integrates important elements of the Antiochene and Alexandrian traditions into the Latin liturgy. Much is the result of fruitful dialogue with the East. As we shall see from the Ravenna document, we have already learned to complement our doctrine of the papacy from sources in the wider tradition, seeing it in the light of the synodal tradition of Orthodoxy and, at the same time, making it much closer to the the practice of popes like Leo the Great. At the same time, the Orthodox engaged in dialogue have had to think more rigorously on what is meant by “primus inter pares”
- Without losing confidence in our own tradition, we should take seriously any approach which is different from ours, even those which seem to contradict ours. If their tradition springs from the same synergy between the Holy Spirit and the Church as ours does, then there is a deeper unity which is awaiting our discovery.
- We must accept that not all apostolic churches are ready for dialogue, either because the prejudice between Orthodox and Catholics makes ecumenism a divisive issue, or because that particular church has different priorities it wishes to pursue. True ecumenism involves looking at this lack of readiness with patience and charity.
- The Russian Orthodox Church can point to both motives. Its over-riding goal is the restoration of Holy Russia: it is trying to restore Christendom in Russia. Part of the slav myth is that all bad things come from the West. In the 19th century, Orthodoxy in Russia tended to adopt the worst Evangelical propaganda against Rome, recruiting it in the service of pan-slavism. The idea of history as a subject really distinct from party propaganda is grasped by very few. Any agreement between Catholic and Orthodox theologians is looked at with alarm.
- From the perspective of the Patriarch of Moscow, any theological agreement before we know and love one another would only spell disaster, as well as a possible loss of an opportunity to convert Russia. The ecumenical priority for Russian ecumenists is that Catholics and Orthodox should cooperate in an entirely uncontroversial manner until we know, trust and love one another: only then will theological agreement work.
Back to the good effects of Catholic -Orthodox theological dialogue on the present day Church, quite apart from the eventual hoped-for effect of restored unity. To illustrate this, I shall use the Ravenna Document, and compare it with the words of Pope Francis.
From the Ravenna Document, written by Catholic and Orthodox theologians
10. This conciliar dimension of the Church’s life belongs to its deep-seated nature. That is to say, it is founded in the will of Christ for his people (cfr. Mt 18, 15-20), even if its canonical realizations are of necessity also determined by history and by the social, political and cultural context.
Defined thus, the conciliar dimension of the Church is to be found at the three levels of ecclesial communion, the local, the regional and the universal: at the local level of the diocese entrusted to the bishop; at the regional level of a group of local Churches with their bishops who “recognize who is the first amongst themselves” (Apostolic Canon 34); and at the universal level, where those who are first (protoi) in the various regions, together with all the bishops, cooperate in that which concerns the totality of the Church. At this level also, the protoi must recognize who is the first amongst themselves.
Pope Francis:
.Let us never forget! For the disciples of Jesus, yesterday, today and always, the only authority is the authority of the service, the only power is the power of the Cross”.
“In a Church Synod, the Synod of Bishops is only the most obvious manifestation of a dynamism of communion that inspires all the ecclesial decisions.
The first level of exercise of collegiality is realized in the particular Churches. After recalling the noble institution of the diocesan Synod, in which priests and laity are called to collaborate with the Bishop for the good of the whole ecclesial community, the Code of Canon Law devotes ample space to those who is usually called the ‘bodies communion ‘of the particular Church: the Council of Priests, the College of Consultors, the Chapter of Canons and Parish Council. Only to the extent that these organizations are connected with the ‘base’ and spring from the people, from everyday problems, can a Church Synod begin to take shape: these instruments, which sometimes progress with fatigue, must be treated as an opportunity for listening and sharing “.
“The second level is that of Ecclesiastical Provinces and Regions, Particular Councils and especially Episcopal Conferences. We need to think about fostering even more instances of collegiality, through these organizations, perhaps by integrating and updating some aspects of the ancient church order. The hope of the Council that such bodies can help increase the spirit of episcopal collegiality has not yet been fully realized. In a Church Synod, as I said, “it is not appropriate for the Pope to replace the local Episcopates in the discernment of all the problems that lie ahead in their territories. In this sense, I feel the need to proceed with a healthy ‘decentralization’.
”The last level is that of the universal Church. Here the Synod of Bishops, representing the Catholic episcopate, it becomes an expression of episcopal collegiality in a synodal Church. It manifests the affective collegiality, which may well become in some circumstances ‘effective’, joining the Bishops among themselves and with the Pope in caring for the people of God. “11. The Church exists in many and different places, which manifests its catholicity. Being “catholic”, it is a living organism, the Body of Christ. Each local Church, when in communion with the other local Churches, is a manifestation of the one and indivisible Church of God. To be “catholic” therefore means to be in communion with the one Church of all times and of all places. That is why the breaking of eucharistic communion means the wounding of one of the essential characteristics of the Church, its catholicity.
This “wounding of one of the essential characteristics of the Church, its catholicity,” has wounded all sides, making us partly blind to the riches enjoyed in the other apostolic churches; but the schism has never been absolute. This has been indicated by a number of factors:
- I used to know an Orthodox bishop, an ex-Benedictine monk of Amay (now Chevetogne) who taught Church History at Oxford, whom I met at the Patristic Conference and while attending the Semaine Liturgique at the Institut Sant-Serge in Paris some time in the early sixties. His name was Bishop Alexis van de Mensbrugge. He had a deep knowledge of both traditions. He told us that, in spite of the schism, there were several instances of parallel spiritual movements – he cited the liturgical emphasis of Cluny and the liturgical splendour of Byzantium, the rich mystical theology of St Gregory Palamas and the Rhineland mystics. Perhaps we could quote Dorothy Day and Saint Mary of Paris. I know that Orthodox apologists immediately hone in on the differences, but Alexis van der Mensbrugge knew too much about both sides and had too much respect to go in for cheap arguments.
- There has been a flourishing, of late, in both Churches on eucharistic ecclesiology with its emphasis on the local church, as well as a theology of communion that binds together “the plenitude of the Church”
- There has never been a time when “communicatio in sacris” has not taken place somewhere, notably in southern Italy until 17th century and in the Middle East. A Greek Orthodox priest told me that he once looked after a Jesuit parish for a few weeks, using the modern Missa normativa, with permission from his bishop. “We are not in communion with the Catholic Church because we disagree about the pope: we don’t want the pope. However, we do recognise the Catholic Church as a sister church, even if somewhat estranged, and we help each other out in emergencies. It doesn’t happen often but it is quite normal. Another example: back in the sixties, a monk of my monastery who speaks Greek celebrated Holy Week for Orthodox students in Rome, using the name of the Patriarch of Constantinople in the Liturgy: it happened every year, because the Greeks couldn’t get their act together. Both Churches pretended it wasn’t happening but could see no alternative. I think this indicates that our ecclesiology does not do justic to the ecclesial reality.
Source: http://fatherdavidbirdosb.blogspot.com/2016/04/history-of-catholic-orthodox-dialogue.html
Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.
"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.
Please Help Support BeforeitsNews by trying our Natural Health Products below!
Order by Phone at 888-809-8385 or online at https://mitocopper.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomic.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomics.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Humic & Fulvic Trace Minerals Complex - Nature's most important supplement! Vivid Dreams again!
HNEX HydroNano EXtracellular Water - Improve immune system health and reduce inflammation.
Ultimate Clinical Potency Curcumin - Natural pain relief, reduce inflammation and so much more.
MitoCopper - Bioavailable Copper destroys pathogens and gives you more energy. (See Blood Video)
Oxy Powder - Natural Colon Cleanser! Cleans out toxic buildup with oxygen!
Nascent Iodine - Promotes detoxification, mental focus and thyroid health.
Smart Meter Cover - Reduces Smart Meter radiation by 96%! (See Video).