www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West apostol;ic succession & the eucharist

Sorry, but I need some explication here. Do I understand from what you say that, while individual bishops, churches, patriarchs can break communion with Rome (as they did), they cannot rescind their actions unilaterally? Are you saying that the rules of the game make divorce easy as pie, while marriage requires the consent of all the gathered family members?

p.s. Noticed the attention to "who speaks for..." Didn't the canons of the 7th Council refer to the Pope as the "spokesman" for the Church?

Alex,

The book is in its final stages of being completed. Remember, its on the Hesychast
tradition with comparative elements with Bonaventure, Scotus, and Buddhism with
some historical background. Its probably
a year out from hitting the shelves which
is normal. It also includes discussion of
what courses were taught at the University of Constantinople, rivalries (like found at
Paris) there were between the Arts Faculty and Theological Faculty (including the graduate school seminary at Hagia Sophia), between Ascetics and Humanists, and the neglected topic of Byzantine Aristotelian scholasticism (surprisingly, while they preserved Plato for us, the Byzantines discouraged study of him in favor of Aristotle. Why? Because Aristotle was perceived as a philosopher and Plato as a pagan theologian). Both the Greek east and Latin west had the "pro, contra, but I say" scholastic method derived from Greek Socratic dialectic and Jewish kalam. So the contrast between a mystical east and a scholastic west doesn't really work. More precisely, the problem that the east had with what is loosely called the "rationalism" (Romanides) of the west does not characterize early western scholastic method last found represented in Bonaventure but begins with Thomas, as Jose de Vinck, Ewert Cousins, and Zachary Hayes also affirm.

Dear Professor,

Excellent!

As you know, the great Hesychast teacher and Father, St Paisius Velichkovsky left the Kyivan Academy precisely because he had disdain for "that pagan rascal" Plato who figured prominently in the course of study there.

Jose de Vinck and Hayes have great insights on the matter.

I believe your work will make a much needed contribution to a cluster of issues surrounding this fascinating area of study.

Alex

Which makes me wonder whether this "hardened position" is nothing more than bitterness that arose later on due to mutual polemics. Even after the Sack in the 1200s we find such examples of intercommunion between East and West.

Quote

St Macarius, Met. of Kyiv, was writing a (nice) letter to the Pope when his cathedral was attacked by the Tatars and he was martyred before the altar.

How gruesome! This tragedy makes me think of the martyrdoms of St. Thomas Beckett and the late Archbishop Oscar Romero (also a saint IMO).

Quote

There are many other examples that one could cite. It was clearly the Greeks themselves who had the greatest reason to hate the Roman West.

Not to excuse or diminish the Sack, I think this is overblown. Of course it is very Irish to hold a grudge 800 years after the tragedy occurred.

Pax Christi,
John

Amen. John Paul II has had a number of similar things to say on this. It truly is the greatest scandal in the Church. In addition it makes the regrettable Protestant habit of "church-hopping" seem to be all right to an outside observer. After all, one church is as good as another. (NOT!)

Quote

A Muslim family still holds the key to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and the poor Ethiopian Orthodox monks are up in the roof somewhere - see how they love one another?

Yes I've seen video of less-than-savory behavior from all sides during Easter celebrations in the Holy Sepulchre. Not only is this a scandal to the Church, but it is a slap in the face of Christ when these episodes occur.

Pax Christi,
John

While Prof. Mether has his perspective on inter-Church relations, the problem is this:

History is history; those people are dead. Their salvation is already decided.

Are we, the living -- under the guidance of the Holy Spirit -- going to be subjugated to their pronouncements?

If both Orthodox and Catholic Christians decided on a personal basis to interact with each other and to share ministries, then why in heaven's name are we going to look back on historical enmities to sabotage what may very well be the work of the Spirit?

What concerns me is the fact that it seems that most of the divisionary tactics are perpetrated by the non-cradle folks. I know absolutely that there are very many searchers who come East truly seeking spiritual treasure. But there are apparently others who come East, armed with texts of history, theology and philosophy, who seem more intent upon destroying any potential interactions between the Eastern and Western Churches. They throw up texts which DEMAND condemnation. Among these folks there seems to be a 'rejoicing' in building walls that buttress the fortress aspect within the Christian community. "WE have the truth"; "You are benighted fools and condemned to hell".

And the 'cradle folks' whose general perspective is Christian love get caught up in the call to war.

There are times, and I'm perfectly honest in this, that I wish that our Eastern Churches were made up solely of our cradle people. I am convinced that we wouldn't have to put up with so much of the crap that seems to flow from some of the newly-arrived who have both an axe to grind and a predilection to engage in fights for whatever reason.

On the other hand, I realize that there are very many folks who are engaged in a process of searching and discerning their spiritual destiny. And if they are indeed finding a home among us Easterns, then we truly rejoice in their progress and discernment. And we welcome them.

Unfortunately, we generally don't have the ability to distinguish between the true seekers and the pugilists. And we have to live with the fighters, even though they are an obstruction to Christian integration because they are willing to sacrifice Christian love for canonical correctness. I guess that they are our cross to bear.

For the Roman folks: blessings and may you grow in spiritual strength where you are planted.

For cradle Easterns: STUDY! Learn our ways. Talk with our older people to learn what we do.

For Western Seekers coming East: Welcome. Please pray with us; and study our ways so that eventually you can become part of the 'koinotis' (=community).

For Westerns coming East to have a refuge from the "Novus Ordo": You are welcome among our peoples to pray and to seek spiritual guidance. Recognize that we are a unique community; recognize that we have our own ways that are not subject to emendation except in response to what our Orthodox brethren do; and recognize that your spiritual fulfilment will only come within your Roman community and among your spiritual peers.

For Eastern folks of another jurisdiction: Welcome. You already know who we are and what we do. No need for education or training. Can you help out during the parish picnic? And by the way, where's your family from?

We have to pray with one another. And we have to recognize that the Holy Spirit is with us and that we are not obligated to dig out all sorts of ancient texts to determine how we should interact with each other.

History is fun. But it's not the key to salvation.

Blessings!

Dear Brother John Betts,

Yes, I am using the Sack of Constantinople more as a "cut off" date (no pun intended) for the real break in East-West relations.

Also, the Crusaders were not the best ambassadors for the West . . .

They really should have been called "sword-bearers" rather than anything else. That rabble was unwieldy and uncontrollable, once they got out in the field as you know.

Good old St Alexander Nevsky put pay to the Teutonic Knights.

It is true what you say that intercommunion was noted between the Churches even after the Sack of C.

For one thing, the Knights Templars, when they emerged from Ethiopia, seem not to have been aware of a schism at all.

They had adopted many Byzantine practices which appeared strange in western Europe.

During their trial, a number of these were brought up as indications of their "heresy."

They also adopted certain Ethiopian church practices, such as the wearing of cords around their necks (the Ethiopian "Matab" or symbol of baptism).

When asked what this was during their trial, the Templars had forgotten its significance. In the absence of an explanation, the French court suggested that is was a diabolical symbol, given its black colour!

Isn't history fascinating?

"Not to us, not to us, but to Thy Name give the Glory, O Lord!"

Alex

Dear John B.,

I heartily agree with your comments on my post. As far as HH Pope John Paul II, I think it's beyond dispute that he's done more to restore communion than any other Pope in history, and certainly can't be faulted for his amazing efforts. I think even though reunion hasn't come about yet, considering the situation before his pontificate, unbelievable progress has been made.

I do hope that he will elevate the Ukrainian Catholic Church to the level of patriarchate as well. Goodness knows the blood of the Ukrainian martyrs under communism has earned such an honour.

In Christ,
Mike

Dear Dr. John,

I know I've argued with you some on this point before, but I think I'm beginning to see more clearly where you're coming from.

Though I haven't really met anyone (as far as I can remember) who has become a member of an Eastern Catholic Church and has carried with them an animosity towards the West, I have read material from former Protestants and Romans who are now Orthodox which is very vitriolic.

Who wouldn't be sad when two jurisdictions (who are not in communion) sharing the same patrimony and ethnic heritage are driven further apart by the misguided zeal of a few fundamentalists?

I think maybe it just comes down to good old charity. If we act charitably to all, in whatever situation we may find ourselves, things usually end up working out pretty well. If not, we end up in two opposing camps ready to beat each other over the heads with our copies of 'Mortalium Animos' and downloaded essays from orthodoxinfo.com, respectively.

In Christ,
Mike

Thanks for the comments, Mike.

Sometimes I get caught up in issues and don't get the point across.

In simple terms, as you note, one can find former Protestants and RCs who have become Orthodox and now publicly despise anything Western, up to and including condemnations of the cradle folks who don't have a problem with their Eastern Catholic counterparts.

Similarly, there are some RCs who come to the Byzantine church but who have problems with the cradle Byzantines interacting with the Orthodox since they're not 'Catholic'. These folks are certainly not the majority of newly-arrived Byzantines, most of whom are what I designate "seekers".

And guess which group gets caught in the middle? I find it amusing that when there is a Catholic/Orthodox dialogue, the Eastern Catholics don't get invited. I would hope that the Eastern bishops would get together with each other sometimes (at some undisclosed time and in an unnamed location).

Lots of the 'faithful' do this already -- though, Lord knows, we need to do it a lot more. We'll get united sometime; we just have to keep working at it and nudging the reluctant to get out of the way. My consolation is: "all things are possible with God".

Blessings!

there are some RCs who come to the Byzantine church but who have problems with the cradle Byzantines interacting with the Orthodox since they're not 'Catholic'.

My experience is that it is often the cradles who ignore the Orthodox (�they�re not Catholic!�) while the newcomers positively identify their new Church with the Orthodox tradition.

Serge

<A HREF="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus�</A>