www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West The Catholic Church has apologized, when will the Orthodox Churches?

The continued discussion over the beauty and effectiveness of various languages used in the Liturgy or Mass is most interesting. However, I wish to return to the purpose of this thread. Will or When will the Eastern Church reciprocate the Pope's apology?

I suspect the question can only be answered through proper discernment of the unity of the various Orthodox Churches. That is to say, "Is it possible for the East to agree amongst itself enough to fashion an apology?" One might say the Magisterium has the East trumped on this one.

I'm just wondering, "How many ecumenical council have the Eastern Churches held since 1054?"

Dan Lauffer

I'm just wondering, "How many ecumenical council have the Eastern Churches held since 1054?"

The same number as the West.

Elias

Elias,

I laughed out loud when I read your answer. You are, of course, correct. My question should have been "How many have been seriously attempted?"

I doubt very seriously that one could get all of the Eastern Churches together, from what I've observed, even for a chicken dinner.

Dan Lauffer

Dan,

Free pierogies might do the trick. The Italians can have ravioli. Then we can sit back and enjoy the food fights. After watching grown bishops wearing tomato sauce and prunes running down their robes, some serious discussions can get started. If things get too hot in the discussions, then more food fights. Every evening they can drink pivo and salute goodbye to the Second Millenium Church.

Their motto can be: "Drink a gallon, eat a ton, 'cause we're the Ecumenical Council of 2001!"


Elias


[This message has been edited by Elias (edited 04-07-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Elias (edited 04-07-2000).]

Elias,

Good post. Now, when are you setting up this food f...er...ecumenical council? I'd like to be invited. :-)

A little humor in tense situations is most welcome.

Dan Lauffer

Dan,

You bring the libations. Nothing under 80 proof. We will have an E. Council whether the bishops show up or not. We'll even invite Rob S. to kick off the first session.

Elias

Dear Elias,
I'll be there just let me know the time and day. Do you like arak or oouzzoo?

Rob

Dear Dan,
There have been no Ecumenical Councils since
787AD. We are waiting for Rome to wake up to come to join the Orthodox fold once again. The Eastern Churches have had synods or councils since the Schism but not Ecumenical Councils. The Orthodox Church has the full authority and capability to have an Ecumencial Council with or without Rome. However, it is the desire of the Church to save Rome and bring her back home. The Orthodox have had taken offense to Rome's so-called Ecumenical Councils(the 8th to 21st) and are not binding on Orthodox or Byzantine Catholic. Unfortunatley, the Byzantine Catholics tend to keep their mouths shut in fear of embarrassing Roman Catholics or their Church. Even though there are some honest people like Elias who will admit to some things I say but they have to keep Rome in mind for fear of offending Roman Catholic sensibilities.

Rob,

Bring anything to the E.C. that works!

French Brandy is fine too. Pardon my Western taste. We can have one big Forgiveness Party. What exactly do bishops drink?

Roman sensibilities? You must be speaking about our bishops again. I see no problem with Orthodox in communion with Rome. AND! I see no problem with Rome in communion with Orthodoxy. It takes two to make it happen.


Elias

Dear Elias,
If you don't mind I will bring Orthodoxy to the Eighth E.C. My bishops aren't that picky about what to drink. The last time I had a drink with one of my bishops he had a glass of white wine. What does your bishop drink? In regards to communion, it must be true communion or else it will not work. And I am not talking about the Eucharist. I suspect you know what I mean.

Rob S,

Communion.

The Roman West recognizes the validity of the Eastern Orthodox Eucharist and other sacred mysteries. I know the term "validity" is a Western term, but I think you know what they mean. Most Orthodox bishops also recognize the 'validity' of the Western Sacraments. The issue boils down to ecclesial/judicial domain of the Pope of Rome. I don't like the current setup, but I will not say that the Second Millenium style of Papacy makes eucharist invalid.

Was there ever a time when East and West was in Schism because of the eucharist? I know many would like to make issue of the leavened/unleavened bread polemics but until the scripture scholars solve what supper Jesus actually celebrated as his last, we will never know if it was the Passover or some other meal. Who is to say that those espousing polemical sides with leavened or unleavened bread will solve the problem if the Gospel writers cannot even agree on.

Anyways, I believe Eucharistic Communion already exists albeit within a failed Ecclesial Communion. What is hopeful is that even though East and West (even the late Fr. Schmemann has a problem with this superficial distinction) is not currently in communion with each other, the Holy Spirit still makes communion for us with God. In some sense we ARE united and in communion but not on our terms. This is sad.

If the Holy Spirit is not working here, then we must also apologize for the failure of the Holy Spirit in our darling schisms.


Elias

Byzantino,

You wrote: "I applaud the Romanian Orthodox Church for being the first Orthodox Church to ask forgiveness for the way it treated the Romanian Catholics."

Where can I get a transcript of this? Can you fill me in more about the Romanian Orthodox-Catholic relations and how they are getting along. Thanks.

Elias

Regarding leavened or unleavened bread, can you imagine a greater "non-issue" which divides Christians?

I mean really, only the devil could think of making the Eucharist an obstacle to communion!

To return to Dan's original point -

"Will or When will the Eastern Church reciprocate the Pope's apology?"

One question I would have is...what would such an apology look like?

Also, who would deliver it? Moscow? Constantinople? Who speaks for Orthodoxy?!?

Gordo, sfo

Gordo,

I simply reiterated the original question. The problem is that like protestantism no one speaks for Orthodoxy. However, is there a possibility that one or two Orthodox leaders could be persuaded to meet with the bishop of Rome and jointly request an ecumenical council?...without food fights. ;-)

Dan Lauffer

Dan wrote:

"However, is there a possibility that one or two Orthodox leaders could be persuaded to meet with the bishop of Rome and jointly request an ecumenical council?...without food fights. ;-)"

My understanding is that that is what originally happened when the Council of Ferra-Florenece was called. The food fight occurred when the people, incited by Mark of Ephesus and others - especially the monks - profoundly rejected the Council's joint declarations.

With that said, I should add that the definitions of the Council were not respectful of the Eastern perspective on various doctrinal points - defining things in and on largely Western terms. (Partially, perhaps, due to the political advantage that the West found itself in, with the East requesting military and practical support against the Muslim invaders.) In that sense, its "ecumenicity", not as a canonical council, but in terms of it's practical effect, was a failure. (I would argue the same for many of the "Western" ecumenical councils without in any way shape or form denying their infallibility or authority. One has to bear in mind, of course, that infallibility does not guarantee that the right thing is said at the right time in the right way --- only that, at a bare MINIMUM, it is without doctrinal error. In other words, they may not have gotten it wrong, but they didn't get it all right either!)

The main reason, aside from the lack of sensitivity to the Eastern perspective - a fact acknowledeged by Pope Paul VI - for the ground-swell of popular rejection was the treatment that many of the Easterns had suffered at the hands (and swords) of Western crusaders. Hence sin beget sin. The popular outcry essentially said "Better to serve under the oppression of the musilms, than to serve the tiara of the Pope!" - or somthing more catchy than that! (Who knows, I'm not into marketing ground swells...)

Some say that the "great schism" occurred in 1054. I say it was at the Council of Ferra-Florence...and it was more like a "great divorce" between estranged spouses. And the West was as much to blame for the "divorce" as was the East.

Two cents -

Peace,

Gordo, sfo