www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Melkite Reunion 1724

I am a newly chrismated Melkite Catholic and am intrigued by the fact that the Melkites are unique among Eastern Catholics in that their Patriarch himself reuinted with Rome (Cyril VI, 1724). I am wondering what the reasons for this were (I've heard the standards--politics, education, etc.--but was their a theological justification offered)? Also, I am aware of the Orthodox view that bishops should only act in consensus with all other bishops, in which case this reunion, from an Orthodox perspective would presumably be invalid. Are there any theological responses to this? I am excited to be part of this forum.

Melkman

Hello,

"I am wondering what the reasons for this were (I've heard the standards--politics, education, etc.--but was their a theological justification offered)?"

Patriarch Cyril offered a Catholic confession of faith along Florentine lines. He seems to have been a Catholic by conviction. There was a movement in the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch for some time in that direction, thanks in large part to the presence of Jesuit schools there that were teaching Catholic ideas to Orthodox students. Cyril was the product of that system. That was one split in the Patriarchate. At the same time, there was a split in the Patriarchate between those who favored Constantinopolitan involvement in the affairs of the Patriarchate, and those who did not. At the time of Cyril, the faction that was against Constantinopolitan rule coalesced with the pro-Catholic faction to elect Cyril as Patriarch, thereby severing a significant part of the Antiochian Patriarchate from the Orthodox Church. The election had some glitches to it (Cyril was 16 at the time).

"Also, I am aware of the Orthodox view that bishops should only act in consensus with all other bishops, in which case this reunion, from an Orthodox perspective would presumably be invalid. Are there any theological responses to this?"

It was valid in the sense that it separated Cyril and his faction from Orthodoxy -- which seems to have been the intention in any case, because of the strong desire of that faction to be out from under Constantinople. In 1724 in the Levant, Orthodoxy meant being under the Ecumenical Patriarch, as the Turks favored a centralized system. To be out from under that centralized system meant to depart from Orthodoxy, which was the intention when the Melkites opted to become Catholic. The motivations were partly religious and partly political.

From Orthodoxy's point of view, the break in faith was the first step away from Orthodoxy. Assuming Cyril was in fact a Catholic by conviction, then his Catholicism made him a non-Orthodox. The formal break merely made this more visible.

Brendan

>>>I am a newly chrismated Melkite Catholic and am intrigued by the fact that the Melkites are unique among Eastern Catholics in that their Patriarch
himself reuinted with Rome (Cyril VI, 1724). I am wondering what the reasons for this were (I've heard the standards--politics, education, etc.--but was
their a theological justification offered)? Also, I am aware of the Orthodox view that bishops should only act in consensus with all other bishops, in which
case this reunion, from an Orthodox perspective would presumably be invalid. Are there any theological responses to this? I am excited to be part of
this forum.<<<

An excellent three volume History of the Melkite Patriarchate by Fr. Cyril Korolevsky is available in paperback through Eastern Christian Publications, Fairfax, VA. E-mail jackfigel@compuserve.com for prices and other details.

Dear Melkman,

Actually, the Union of Brest-Litovsk in 1596 was also signed by the Primate of the Kyivan Metropolia himself.

Some have also suggested that St Peter, Metropolitan of Kyiv and Moscow was also, at least personally, in union with Rome at the Council of Lyons and St Macarius, Metropolitan of Kyiv was martyred just as he was writing a positive letter to the Pope of Rome.

You could have no better tutor in Melkite history than Brendan who was a Melkite. I understand that he was a "Melkite among Melkites." The Orthodox Church is fortunate to have him.

Alex

"An excellent three volume History of the Melkite Patriarchate by Fr. Cyril Korolevsky"

An excellent recommendation, but a lengthy one. A much shorter alternative is "The Melkite Church" by Fr. Serge Descy, which is available through the Melkite Eparchy of Newton.

Brendan

Dear Brendan,

Initially, I thought a Melkite was something that flew in the air as you pulled it on a string up against the wind .

Thanks for the references.

Do you still consider yourself to be, in some sense, a "Melkite?"

You seem to express great continuing attachment for the Melkite heritage, which is as it should be since you were formally a Melkite Greek Catholic.

Is your being Orthodox an issue of faith alone (no pun intended) and you still consider yourself to be an "Orthodox Melkite?"

You are very fascinating person and teacher and I was just wondering.

Alex

Hi Alex --

"Do you still consider yourself to be, in some sense, a "Melkite?""

No, not really. I consider myself to be an 'alumnus' of the Melkite Church.

"Is your being Orthodox an issue of faith alone (no pun intended)"

It is principally that, yes.

Brendan