www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Pope to Patriarch: We need unity faster

Father bless!

Of course you are correct, I merely see no reason for the BCC to be separate from ACROD.


Amen. My point is that the BCC needs to play a part in reunion of the Churches.



Of course, but we might very well be a catalyst in the process of reunion.

I really like Mike's train of thought. as I see it, the EC churches don't have to jump ship and run off to Constantinople, and we are not "held hostage" by Rome. the very existence of EC churches is that of a two way bridge: we witness to bridging the West and East in that we are in communion with the Holy See, and we are a witness to the possibility and eventuality of full reconciliation between Rome and Constantinople. we are a unique people, folks.
Much Love,
Jonn

Well, St. Maximos the Confessor was not a patriarch, nor was he infallible in everything he said. St. Maximos had good reasons to be particularly fond of Rome, but if we read these quotes of his in context, we come to realize it isn't so simple as a direct endorsement of universal jurisdiction of the papacy. For more on this and St. Maximos the Confessor's view of the Church. see this article by Fr. Andrew Louth. http://www.verujem.org/maksim_ispovednik/Louth_Maximus_ecclesiology.pdf

Joe

While not a Patriarch, or infallible Maximos, Confessor, is a saint venerated by east and west alike. What he writes is revered and carries considerable weight. Many, as do Mike L. and I, feel that the quote noted above expresses the orthodox faith of the first seven ecumenical councils, and that the papal claims made today bear a striking resemblance. In any event, I call attention to a beautiful and relevant article on Zenit today that brought tears to my Irish eyes. http://www.zenit.org/article-23870?l=english

To get East/West unity, why can't everyone do what the Melkites did? I don't understand what is wrong with the Melkite approach.

http://www.melkite.org/sa3.htm

That same two-point statement of faith there on the web page is reprinted in "The Melkite Handbook" published by the Eparchy of Newton, Massachussetts for all Melkite churches in America (yes, I live in America) as being the official statement of faith for Melkite Catholics.

[quote]
1. I believe everything which Eastern Orthodoxy teaches.
2. I am in communion with the Bishop of Rome as the first among the bishops, according to the limits recognized by the Holy Fathers of the East during the first millennium, before the separation.
[end quote]

And yes, the Melkites are *Catholics* in communion with the Biship of Rome. They are.

So, I have completely missed the part where Eastern Orthodox theology and church practice are incompatible with communion with Rome. We've proven right here with the Melkite Catholic Church that there is no inherent conflict.

The Zoghby initiative has been rejected by the Vatican, by no less an authority than Pope Benedict XVI himself (when he was Cardinal Ratzinger).
http://www.ratzinger.it/documenti/BeatitudeMaximos.htm

The Zogbhy idea was a good one but the problem is that it implies rejection of papal supremacy (universal jurisdiction and infallibility). This is unacceptable to Rome. It is one reason why I, a former Melkite, became Orthodox.

My friends, I am all for praying for unity. I am all for respecting one another and helping one another as best we can. But again I say that when it comes to the role of the papacy, our two Churches are bumping heads and it is very unlikely (personally, I think practically impossible) that this will be resolved. As my priest said to me one day, "we have grown too far apart and we are just too different. It is not God's will for us to be one."

Joe

The two points expressed by the Melkite Church, known as the Zogbhy Initiative are indeed in the Melkite Handbook, word for word. This is the formal position of the Melkite Holy Synod. The Melkite Handbook was published this year and was made available at the 2008 Melkite Convention, with the Blessing of His Grace Archbishop Cyril.

Obviously, the Vatican and Ratzinger response to it has no bearing on the Melkites. Why? Because the Melkite Handbook, a small catechetical book espouses the very same points His Grace Sayedna Elias proposed and the Vatican AND Antiochian Orthodox rejected. Remember, the Handbook was printed this year and the "official" double rejection was almost ten years ago.

Then, why did Bishops and priests who are incredibly more learned than the two of us put together accept the doctrine? Accepting the two "sticking points" is not more politically expedient, it does not give one more earthly glory, it makes one a laughing stock to the "intelligentsia," etc...

Excuse me? Surely that is a direct denial of the Gospel.

Fr. Serge

Good to hear from you Dr. Eric...

Not sure I follow what you are saying...??? What Bishops and priests are you speaking of...the only ones I can think you could be referring to are those at Vatican I???? If those are the ones you are referring to, history shows us that many, if not a majority were actually opposed to papal infallibility and many left before such vote could take place...since infallibility rests with the CHURCH not with a person other than Christ Himself...

There were councils before Vatican I that asserted the Pope's authority over a Council.

Still not following you...what does the fact that the Pope presided over councils have to do with infallibility of the Pope??? Possibly if you site some of the councils you are making reference to that would help clear it up for me...

One can do all sorts of things with words - and many of them are abusive. However, it is not particularly abusive to inquire just whom one has in mind as "the Church".

My take on the problem with the Zoghby Initiative is that many people find it threatening - there are those in this world who prefer a state of comfortably separation to a restoration of full communion which would inevitably make demands on all concerned.

Fr. Serge

Dear Fr. Serge, perhaps you are right. Or perhaps there are other understandings of unity. I honestly don't know.

Joe

Dear Fr. Serge and everyone,

What concrete things do you believe Rome would have to sacrifice and that the Orthodox would have to sacrifice in order for reunion to occur?

or alternatively, what would the Orthodox have to accept in order for reunion to occur and if reunion occured, would there have to be any change in Orthodox teachings and practices regarding divorce & remarriage, contraception, etc?

Joe