www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News agreement on synodality and primacy

Here is a more extensive and insightful article on the subject. Chieti [lastampa.it] Of course, I think we all look forward to seeing the document itself and seeing just what the Georgian objections are. I like the "Orthodox Taliban" reference noted of Metropolitan John Zizoulas!

While I am generally sympathetic to ecumenical gestures, I think dismissing critics as "Orthodox Taliban" represents a destructive smugness. Failure to take seriously the anti-ecumenists or have an honest dialogue with them will guarantee their intransigence and indignation. And some of their concerns are in fact quite valid.

How very inappropriate to refer to the Eastern Catholic Churches - especially the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church - as uniates. It is surprising that the Roman Catholic participants use the word uniate which is most insulting to their brothers and sisters who are as Catholic and Orthodox as they come.

The "issue" is not the Eastern Catholic Churches - the Russian Orthodox Church is the issue.

The problem with having an "honest dialogue" with such is that they often render any dialogue impossible by their intransigence which in itself can be a destructive smugness. I must admit, on second thought, "Orthodox Taliban" is a bit insensitive and harsh. Can we forgive the learned, old Metropolitan? The presence of such a full representation (minus Bulgaria) at Chieti is remarkable, and leaves me very optimistic for further breakthroughs.

Well said. It is disrespectful and potentially destructive to dismiss Eastern Catholics, et al as "uniates." Using loaded language from 400 bloody years ago is inappropriate.

I think what His Eminence misses with his statement is that the Balamand agreement wherein both Catholic and Orthodox participants came to say that the Eastern Catholic Churches "had the right to exist" is part of the foundation of future agreements. So the document that was just agreed on probably assumes Balamand. Otherwise, the whole exercise is just twisting in the wind, if each one means it is done in isolation.

As I've said before, I think it may be time for a reflection about the ecumenical endeavor. After the Pan-Orthodox Great Council, it is apparent that a very significant part of the Orthodox Church is not in favor of the ecumenical efforts of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. I think that there are also sections of the Latin Church that are not in favor of this endeavor either.

The hard questions are whether we really want to be in communion--in the sense that Father Robert Taft spoke of and which was linked on this forum in the past. We all seem to have things that make the other uncomfortable. What, then, is of the essence and what is something we can live with--something like having that crazy relative we wince at when we think of the upcoming holiday season when families gather. Even more to the point--are we too comfortable with our divisions?

I have to think in terms of the genocide of our brethren in Islamic countries and the more subtle, but equally virulent, persecution of secularists in what many think are countries where we think we are living in peace. Together we stand; divided we are picked off one by one.

Bob

"Eastern Catholic Churches = Uniatism" makes as much sense as "Americans = Fourth of July".

The two events with the Patriarch/Catholicos are beautifully captured by Vatican TV -

[/url]

[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGH4K-lu34E&t=4142s] [youtube.com]