As we Orthodox have maintained all along a mistake was made.

That's a shame. We must just keep praying.

CDL

This was inevitable - Bartholomew of Constantinople has said the same thing each time the proposal has been advanced.

Fr. Serge

At least we had the Vesper's service at Outside the Walls. Keep praying, I agree.
I understand why we can not just call ourselves reunited without actually being of one mind and faith, but I do think we need to keep talking. Although I do not think that the church was not completely in union of faith to every last detail all the years before 1054 either. So I wonder just how united union must be? I think this verse read on the feast day of Sts. Peter and Paul is a good prayer for us to continue with...

Romans 15: 5- 6 Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to Christ Jesus,
so that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

C. I. X.

In John 17:11 Christ too prayed.

This is only logical. It is this "full union in Faith" which must be strived for.

Dn. Robert

My question is: what exactly is "full union in Faith"? How is it defined? Clearly, as mentioned above, East and West were not in complete agreement on all points of doctrine in the 1st millennium, especially the 2nd half. Yet they were (mostly) in communion with each other. Today, there are those on the extremes of each Church who would require complete and absolute submission to every detail of their respective Church's doctrines before they would accept union (Thank God Benedict and Bartholomew do not subscribe to his viewpoint!), but what should "full union in faith" look like?

Not the easiest question - but it involves the distinction between dogma and theologoumena.

Fr. Serge

C. I. X.
Are we looking at this as Westerners, awaiting for directive from the top? As Easterners we already have a directive from the top in John 17:11. There was no prohibition of the idea. There seams to be a ground swell in Rus� (Ukraine and Slovakia). The diaspora here needs to develop itself and support this at the grass root level.

There is more than the Eucharist we can commune together with. Neighboring parishes both Orthodox and Catholic whether Rusyn, Russian and Ukrainian can host, visit and support each other with communal dinners, Moleban prayer services and joint charitable and educational projects. Have a neighboring OCA parish host nursery school to 1st grade, the Byzantine Catholics 2 to 4, the Ukrainian Orthodox 5 to 8 and Ukrainian Catholics high school with an adult gathering at the Carpatho-Russian Orthodox in the same town sharing Sunday School efforts. Or the neighboring OCA parish can sale pyrohy, the Byzantine Catholics haluschky, the Ukrainian Orthodox borsch and Ukrainian Catholics kovbasa and kraut with the Carpatho Russian Orthodox doing home made bread in the same town sold from one location, the most accessible of their halls with a parking lot so each can profit from their efforts. Then a joint choir can get together only to sing parastas at the funeral homes. Eventually communal commemorations of Akcija Wisla, the Famine Genocide, 1,025 anniversary of Slavic Christendom or any other reason we can get together to jointly host and received. Maybe a weekend �Byzantine Orbit Festival� at the local convention exhibit hall will develop. If we act as Christians by our love locally maybe upper management will get the idea.

That's it in a "nutshell".

Dn. Robert

Fr. Serge,

Exactly!

Part of the problem is that Photius' condemnation of the Filioque as heretical presupposes the dogmaticity of the Monarchy of the Father.

Another part is that the Council of Florence, which declared the Filioque to be dogmatic, is regarded as an infallible ecumenical council in the West.

The challenge will be to get beyond both barriers ...


Peace,
Deacon Richard

Sorry after this issue of a Catholic press release spreading misinformation about the EP and "double unity", I doubt any Orthodox churches will want to be involved in any such ideas you suggest. There is just too much room for misrepresentation again and Catholics claiming intercommunion.

I thought it might be too good to be true.

I am okay that we are not there yet, but I get really mad about false reports!

Lance, I'll say up front that I am sorry you feel so hurt by the position the EP took (perhaps I am reading too much into your words). Unlike you however, as a member of the EOC, I would have been scandalized if he had actually said what had been reported. Whether some like it or not, the EOC has always taken a hard line when it comes to reunification. There has to be unity of faith. There really is not any on the real, important issues that divide the two churches (e.g., papal primacy and infallibility, original sin, filioque etc).. We all know why the EOC takes the position it does, although some members of the Church of Rome decry it. Many of the members of the EOC like the status quo and I must include myself in that category.

C. I. X.
�Sorry after this issue of a Catholic press release spreading misinformation about the EP and "double unity", I doubt any Orthodox churches will want to be involved in any such ideas you suggest. There is just too much room for misrepresentation again and Catholics claiming intercommunion.� Quote Halia 12

On a student level or in the kitchen (domestic) church fellowship? Neither side is infallible when it comes to press release miscommunication. It is unchristian to assume we cannot overcome problems together, isolation is hardly productive even in a cloister. I assume you are too young to remember the Millennium war of 1988. Soviet disinformation manipulated official Orthodox perspective to secure a Slavophil reality of Kyivan Rus� Christendom. Ukrainians both Catholic, Orthodox and those only cultural worldwide rebelled together on a grass root level, disregarding clerical haughty isolation. The western media was so impressed with the volume of activity that when the Churches of Ukraine emerged from the catacombs the free press debunked the Soviet misinformation in their reports. Soon after the Godless empire�s facade fell freeing all Churches to carry out their evangelical mission. Some may see today�s reality in the Ukrainian Republic and Slovakia as problematic, others see it as the continuing work of the Holy Spirit in God�s time. What dogma do either not believe? I am not asking about the Mysteries� working which some are arrogant enough to think their limited understanding can comprehend. Do we really fear a flaw in orthodoxy or a compromise of absolute control? Do we Easterners only wave the vale during the Creed to shoo the flies?

Well, the report originated with RISU, so I think we better ask RISU to be a bit more careful next time.

As it is, the Russians are already accusing the UGCC of manipulating news to suit the latter's needs, and while we Catholics are firmly behind our Ukrainian brethren, incidents like this only lessen our side's credibility with the unconvinced.

For full disclosure, I had unwittingly played a role in spreading this news by posting the news from RISU on the Rorate Caeli blog, whence it spread to other Roman Catholic websites that normally don't pay attention to news from the East. Sorry.

Before anyone, on either side of the aisle, gets too worked up, let's take a deep breath and employ some perspective. There are few enough folks here too young to not have encountered - in both the secular and religious domains - instances of media reports that prove to be grossly inaccurate.

There is an old adage to the effect that "if it sounds too good to be true, it likely is not." Now, before I get jumped on - I do not happen to believe that this sounded "too good to be true" - but substitute "unlikely" for "good" and I'm right there. The likelihood that His All-Holiness propounded the idea of 'dual unity' in a posiitive light was, to my mind, more than a bit far-fetched, unless he had reached a point in his life when his plan for next month was to enter a monastery or take up the mantle of pastoring a small temple in the midst of nowhere.

Catholics who jumped with joy at the prospect were grasping at liturgical straws. Orthodox who recoiled in horror at the prospect were equally guilty of over-reacting.

And to both those who would have the initial press release be evidence of a Catholic conspiracy and to those (and, yes, they'll come along shortly), of the other persuasion, who will pronounce that it really was true - a trial balloon, which he eventually had to reel in, get over it and face the reality that Church unification will come about when the Holy Spirit descends and affords earthly hierarchs the necessary wisdom and understanding and faith, in themselves and their counterparts, to achieve it. Could it ever hope to come about in the manner suggested by the early press report? Maybe, dual communion existed in some places for prolonged periods after the much-touted "official" schism of 1054 and has been advanced since that time by such as Sayednah Elias Zoghby, of blessed memory. But this is not seemingly the time for it to happen and, clearly, there would be required an enormous prior effort involving prayer, dialogue, and practical groundwork.

There is a decided tendency on the part of some to seize on every instance of pastoral accomodation between the Churches as evidence of an immediately forthcoming union. We need to see those, instead, as a recognition between the respective parties of the importance to care for the spiritual well-being of their peoples and exercise the economia necessary to meet such by partnering with those of other Apostolic Churches that they understand as being of a spiritual mmind with their Church, regardless of the very real doctrinal issues that separate them.

By the same token, to dismiss - out of hand - the notion of everyday cooperation in worthwhile endeavors that do not threaten the integrity or independence of either Church, such as Mykhayl has suggested, suggests an entrenched attitude that those of the other Church are somehow less desirable folks with whom to associate, Shall we worry as to whose parking lot hosts the unified food fair? Will there be more glory in that than in being the owner of the parking lot in which the fair's attendees park?

In 40 years, I have yet to see anyone translate between Melkite Catholicism and Antiochian Orthodoxy on the basis of which parish makes better fatayah or uses more tomatoes in its tabboulah and I rather much doubt that it would be any different in a food cookoff between the Ruthenians, ACROD, and the OCA (otherwise, much of the population of southwestern NY and adjacent PA would be enrolled at St Michael's in Binghamton, just for the pirohi).

So, let us continue in brotherhood and sisterhood, praying for unity - because if any of you truly think that God wouldn't prefer it, you have a stange vision of Him and I'd prefer you not stand next to me in a lightning storm. But, keep in mind that unity will come at a price - for all involved and that it's not the equivalent of one of Rachel's 30 minute meals. It's more likely to be dessert for a multi-course meal of humble makings, served over decades, if not centuries.

Many years,

Neil

Could they not also cooperate together in building new "co used" churches, and their maintainance? it certainly would be much easier financially. Or is this too much to hope for?
Stephanos I

John, you completely misread my post. I was not mad about the Patriarch repudiating the story. I was mad a false story was published to begin with. I thought I was pretty clear. I am not hurt in the least by the patriarch's true position.

Thank you. It is so refreshing to read these words by a Catholic. It gives me hope for the future just when I was at the point of dispair. It is only in the spirit of truth and
honesty from both sided that we can move forward. I expect my church, the Orthodox Church to be honest too.

I am pleased that his holiness Bartholomew has not proposed something that would compromise the faith and unity of the Orthodox Church.

Joe

Had AsianPilgrim taken the time to read the RISU story, he/she would have noticed that in fact the RISU was re-posting a story which had been originaly posted by the German magazine KAT.net in June, 2008. Contrary to what AsianPilgrim states, the story did not origninate with the RISU.

http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/news/article;22800/

I.F.

Whoa Nelly, Jean Francois, Asianpilgrim has already apologized and eaten crow over this, you can let it go now!

Some of these postings are leading me into temptation. Uncharacteristically, perhaps, I refrained from any comment on the news report; my reason was that on previous occasions Bartholomew has emphatically refused any suggestion of "double communion" (even though we all know places where it exists). I found it incredible that he would make such a volte-face under such circumstances. So I kept quiet.

Temptation or not, this is no special merit of mine; I simply did not believe the report and therefore let nature take its course.

To those who are grieved (and there is good reason to be grieved) I can only recommend patience, prayer, persistence, and love. To those who are tempted to rejoice, I suggest an examination of conscience. Being satisfied with the status quo is not honestly Christian.

Fr. Serge

Bless, Father,

As has been reported here from time to time, there have been instances of this - although it is admittedly not common.

The best known case (because it got a lot of both positive and negative reaction at the time) involved a joint undertaking in Syria by the Melkite Catholics and Antiochian Orthodox. It was spurred by restrictive governmental policy vis-a-vis granting the requisite permits for a village in need of both temples, but limited to one by governmental edict. A generous donor underwrote much of the cost and the ongoing maintenance is shared by the two communities. Admittedly, the abiding goodwill between the two Churches generally, especially in the "Old World", and between the two Patriarchs involved in particular, was the deciding factor in this coming about.

Many years,

Neil

Orest,

I must admit, I wished the story was true. I am a Zoghby guy. i do yearn for unity. I had passed the story along on my blog, and of course, had to remove it when it was discovered to be false. I was embarrassed to have highlighted it.

But I respect this patriarch greatly. I did not experience a personal sense of disappointment when the story was found to be false. I very much respect and understand why the Orthodox on this forum would have problems had this story been true.

After reading Sergius Bulgakov's the Orthodox Church, I understand that there are great differences between the ecclessiology of Orthodoxy and Rome. Bulgakov explains the differences between the way the two churches understand external authority and why in his view no one can be THE vicar of Christ on earth. He greatly values sobornost.

Yet, I think Fr. Serge is correct in saying that we should grieve our divisions, the broken body of Christ. We should always be praying and seeking unity.

I would hope all of the Apostolic Churches at least, would be able to achieve Eucharistic unity.

Blessings,

Lance

Christ is in our midst!! He is and always will be!!

AMEN

BOB

Deacon Richard,

With all due respect, the Ecumenical Council of Florence is indeed an infallible ecumenical council for all of Catholicism, not simply the West. A council cannot be ecumenical, is my understanding, for only part of the Church, but not the entire Church.

Second Vatican Council, in Lumen Gentium, explicitly reaffirms the ecumenical authority of both Florence and Trent, and puts them on an even par with Second Nicaea. That clearly shows, I believe, that the filioque is obviously an infallible, de fide, article of faith for all Catholics, and is on an even par with inconodule.

This is also further supported by the Eastern Catholic Code of Canon Law in conjunction with its authoritative amendments stemming from the 1998 issuing of the apostolic letter Ad Tuendem Fidem.

As an aside, I would also say, for what it's worth, that I believe that the theological idea that a certain monarchial majesty accrues solely to the Father is not a contradiction with filioque.

Patriarch Bartholomew's position seems perfectly reasonably and understandable from an Eastern Orthodox perspective.

Best to all,
Robster

Hence, the reasons that Eastern Catholics, imho, need to decide are they Orthodox Or Roman Catholic. The so called bridge, has no legs. Rhetoric, is not reality! I know I see numerous people on this forum and others tha speak of the Zogbhy Initiative...In theory, I would accept it and actually believed and lived it long before the initative was set forth I believe in 1996. The reality is Rome has put itself into a box with infalible dogma, (whether through their additional "ecumenical councils", so called, or their "papal infallibility"...I see the unia as a hinderance to true Church Unity rather than a help. As long as there are Eastern Catholics (I use the term as those united with Rome), running around saying we can accept these creations even if we say we do not agree with them, Rome will not see the error of its ways.

Job, good points.

Joe

Job,

I think you've touched on an important point here.

The Union of Brest, as well as the other unia, really did IMHO call for us to be "Orthodox in communion with Rome." What happened, however, was that people like our brother Robster *politely* pointed out that communion meant unity of faith, and that was understood to mean we had to accept as dogmatic everything that Rome set forth as dogmatic. This was the status quo right up until Vatican II.

Good point, but I think things are starting to change. In the past, when many Catholics--including priests and bishops--did not accept us as being truly Catholic, the tendency was to try and show that we were 'just as Catholic as anyone.' This attitude is dying out now, and even though it is by no means dead, I still think we are getting closer to a time when the ECCs will start asserting themselves.

I do agree that it is not good for ECs to be seen (or to see ourselves) as either 'RCs in OC clothing' or a kind of mongrel, 'neither fish nor fowl.' It is this kind of attitude that led to our being ineffective as a bridge.


Peace,
Deacon Richard

And disappointed over false hopes!

It's certainly an embarrassment to us Catholics that such a well-respected Catholic publication made such a mistake.
But I have to ask, what would be the big deal if the article had been true?

Specifically, what would it have meant if the article had been true? That the EP sees dual-communion as a possibility? Yes. That the EP believes dual-communion is possible now? No, nowhere did the article claim that.

I think the most anyone could have reasonably inferred from the article is (or rather, was) that the EP believes that the goal of dual-communion is less distant than the goal of complete reconciliation between Catholics and Orthodox.

"Dual communion" is not possible. One is either in communion or one is not. We can't have a situation where some Orthodox Churches are in communion with some Catholic Churches while the others are not.

Joe

C. I. X.

What does "so-bor-nu-yu Tser-kow" in the creed call for?

I don't know.

Joe