www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West All for One? The idea of unity divides Catholics and Orthodox Christians

http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110006972

All for One?
The idea of unity divides Catholics and Orthodox Christians.

BY FREDERICA MATHEWES-GREEN
Friday, July 15, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

"The need is felt to join forces and spare no energies" to renew dialogue
between Catholic and Orthodox Christians, said Pope Benedict XVI. In
comments to delegates of the Patriarch of Constantinople on June 30, the
pope explained that "the unity we seek is neither absorption nor fusion, but
respect for the multiform fullness of the Church."

Outsiders may wonder: Why don't those two venerable churches just kiss and
make up? From the outside, they look a lot alike. Each church claims roots
in earliest Christian history. The dispute that split them is a thousand
years old. Isn't it time to move on?

It is my own Orthodox brethren who appear to be the cranky partners.
Catholics have been making friendly overtures for more than a decade now.
Pope John Paul II even said that the extent of papal power--over which the
two churches split in the 11th century--could be "open to a new situation."
Both churches hold as ideal a united body with Rome as "first among equals."
Yet the Orthodox drag their feet, sometimes seeming downright rude. A
Catholic friend tells me that the attitude seems to be: "Take this olive
branch and shove it."

The Orthodox Church is smaller and less powerful, so we don't get much
opportunity to explain how things seem from our perspective. But it comes
down to two words: "unity" and "chaos."

From a Roman Catholic perspective, unity is created by the institution of
the church. Within that unity there can be diversity; not everyone agrees
with official teaching, some very loudly. What holds things together is
membership. This kind of unity makes immediate sense to Americans: Whatever
their disagreements, everyone salutes the flag, and all Catholics salute, if
not technically obey, Rome's magisterium.

When Roman Catholics look at Orthodoxy, they don't see a centralized, global
institution. Instead, the church appears to be a jumble of national and
ethnic bodies (a situation even more confused in the U.S. as a result of
immigration). To Catholics, the Orthodox Church looks like chaos.

But from an Orthodox perspective, unity is created by believing the same
things. It's like the unity among vegetarians or Red Sox fans. You don't
need a big bureaucracy to keep them faithful. Across wildly diverse
cultures, Orthodox Christians show remarkable unity in their faith. (Of
course there are plenty of power struggles and plain old sin, but the
essential faith isn't challenged.) What's the source of this common faith?
The consensus of the early church, which the Orthodox stubbornly keep
following. That consensus was forged with many a bang and dent, but for the
past millennium major questions of faith and morals have been pretty much at
rest in the Eastern hemisphere.

This has not been the case in the West. An expanded role for the pope was
followed by other theological developments, even regarding how salvation is
achieved. In the American church, there is widespread upheaval. From the
Orthodox perspective, the Catholic Church looks like chaos.

This is hard for Catholics to understand; for them, the institution of the
church is the main thing. If the church would enforce its teachings, some
adherents say, there would be unity. The Orthodox respond: But faith must be
organic. If you have to force people to it, you've already lost the battle;
that wouldn't be unity at all.

So we've got two different definitions of "unity." Is "unity" membership in
a common institution or a bond of shared belief? The Orthodox take their cue
from Christ's prayer to his Father, "that they all may be one, even as we
are one." What kind of unity do the Father and the Son have? They are not
held together by an outside force; they are one in essence and have a common
mind. If we are "partakers of the divine nature," as St. Peter said, then,
the Orthodox believe, we'll participate in that mind. That's what makes us
the "body of Christ," the church.

Thus the Orthodox hesitate at a phrase like the pope's "multiform fullness."
Catholic diversity makes it easy for Catholics to embrace us: When they look
at us, they see the early church. We fit right in. But when the Orthodox
look at Catholics, we see an extra thousand years of theological
development, plus rebellion in the pews. What kind of unity do Catholics
have, at present, that we could enter?

There are plenty of good reasons for the Orthodox and Roman Catholic
churches to talk. Discussion clears away misunderstanding, and common causes
can benefit from the energies of both churches. But we can't be fully united
until we agree on what "unity" means.

Ms. Mathewes-Green is the author of "At the Corner of East and Now: A Modern
Life in Ancient Christian Orthodoxy."

Thank you, Father.

This articulates why I am Orthodox in Communion with Rome and why I am not Roman Catholic. I had an interesting conversation with one of the members of this board who lives in another part of the US. He tells me that the relations between Catholics and Orthodox are much warmer in his part of the country than they are in many other parts of the country. Whether or not we can share each others sacraments I wonder if we could think of several ways to carry on shared discussions and shared liturgies and pray together for the day when we share sacraments?

Dan L

Ms Matthews' makes the point that the fundamental difference between the Occident and the Orient is eccelsiological. However, I do not believe that the breadth of her article sheds any more light on the reasons for the East-West schism.

Ms Matthews also seems to have misunderstood what role the Papacy plays in the Catholic Church. She speaks of the use of force to get people to believe yet highlights that many Catholics do not assent to the teachings of the Magisterium. In light of this her inference that Catholic unity is not based upon a unity of faith is surprising. Since the Magisterium of the Church teaches that it is and both 'Lumen Gentium' and the Catechism underscore that point. In light of this the following words are greatly perplexing and I query the Orthodox on this board as to whether this is your idea of Catholic ecclesiology:



Impossible.

Also her contention that Orthodox faith now is based upon the consensus of the early Church is not entirely true either. For example, the Church Fathers when they did speak on the subject of contraception vehemently condemned the practice. Yet, I hear many Eastern Orthodox bodies condone the practice as part of the laws of the house.

I do not wish to seem adversarial but I cannot tolerate the dissemination of error either particularly when it appears to depict Catholic ecclesiology as if it were penned by the Parliament of Elizabeth I.

Bless, Father Thomas!

Are you coming to Toronto for the OCA event next week?

Alex

Myles,

Within the context of your observation ending with your word "Impossible" how would you understand the ordination of active homosexuals in the American Church? Do you think that the Orthodox mode of operation is simply to ignore diversity as they do over the issue of multiple divorce or do you think the difference is something else?

dan l

May the Lord God bless you.

Yes, I'll be arriving on Sunday evening. I will be a member of the Summary Team which will be determining priorities for the next 10 years. I will also be participating in a panel discussion on parish health on Tuesday, and preaching at Wednesday Vespers.

Priest Thomas

I've heard many times on this very board that Byzantine Catholics do not view the role of the Papacy in the same way as Roman Catholics. Since I am neither, I can only report what I've read. This, I believe is what she is referring to.

Contraception is not a doctrinal or a dogmatic issue. While some on this board have raised it to the same status as the Nature of Christ, it simply isn't. I've seen the Orthodox position well articulated by Rilan (not sure of the spelling - forgive me) and a few others, but the insistence of some in making this *the* key issue is simply ridiculous.

Priest Thomas

In answer to the question of the US Church I'd simply call it disobidience. The Church condemns homosexuality and Rome has expressed that homosexuals are not fit for the priesthoood. You are making the error of equating the Church with the people in the Church. If I, a Catholic, murder someone does that mean the Church condones murder? That argument is not logically sound.

As for the question of divorce and remarriage. I am unsure whether all Orthodox churches practice this rule. I know the Eastern Orthodox do but I do not know about the non-Chalcedonians. Thus I cannot give an informed response to your question.

Dear Fr Thomas I am not a Byzantne Catholic I am a Latin and I view the Papacy as the Catechism tells me to. I do not believe, that the Byzantine Catholics view it any differently as a matter of speaking. Individual Roman and Greek Catholics might have contrasting views of the Bishop of Rome but it has been my experience that this is normally because they have not been properly catechised.

I used the example of contraception as an illustration I do not see it as a key issue but I think you're downplaying its importance Father. For instance St John Chrysostom preached:

In both cases St Chrysostom clearly is preaching that obstructing procreation is sinful. This makes it a matter of doctrine. If St Chrysostom had not believed it to be so he would not have preached thus. Agreed, contraception is not the key issue and not all the Church Fathers deign to speak about it. My point is though that when they do e.g. in St John's case, they condemn the practice as evil.

If Ms Matthews is trying to say the Orthodox faith is based upon a consensus of the patristic material she will thus rightly concede that those who see contraception as a matter of personal choice are at odds with St John Chrysostom and the various other Fathers that agree with him.

In the early centuries of the Church, contraception and abortion were virtually synonymous, hence, contraception equalled murder. With certain technologies and methods today, this is not the case. And there are different Orthodox viewpoints on the subject.

I do not want this thread to become a discussion of birth control. I will simply make this quote from the OCA webpage, which I think is a sensible answer to a complex question:

Priest Thomas
and father of three beautiful girls [photos.yahoo.com]

Your children are quite beautiful Fr Thomas and I have no intention turning this into a contraception thread either. I do believe that the family is an icon of Christ and His Church, indeed with Pope John Paul through the Theology of the Body I even believe the family can even become an icon of the the Trinity and from this I also think birth control is absolutely wrong.

However, all of this, as you pointed out is veering completely off topic.

My point was that Ms Matthews views on the Roman Catholic Church's ecclesiology are inaccurate and present, as previously stated, a view of the Church that might mistake onlookers into believing Rome had a Protestant ecclesiology of a 'church of parties'. I wished to highlight this point particularly for any lurkers so that they might not believe this is an authentic view of what Roman Catholicism actually teaches. As I underscored in my reply to Dan, Rome's loss of control over individual (or even large groups of Catholics) doesnt make her doctrine adjustable to their whims.

If anyone on the board actually wants an authentic picture of the Roman Catholic Church as it sees itself they should read this section of the Catechism of the Catholic Church [vatican.va] .

Bless, Father Thomas!

I'll look for you on Tuesday - I'm going to try and swing by . . .

Alex

I'll be in my riassa and cross.

Along with about 400 other guys dressed the same way.

PT

More poppy-cock pie in the sky.

Unity among Orthodox is the same as unity among Catholics. The Orthodox is indeed the same species of homo-sapiens and subject to all the limits and faults of that shared nature.

A comparison of Chritian unity to vegetarians and Red Sox fans?? Really. Is that all Christ is?? A fad?? I was under the impression that all graces and unity flow from the Eucharist and apostolilc authority? from Christ himself and not from a shared fad.

Let us speak of unity within the confederation of Orthodox churches.

The Orthodox Coptic church - long excommunicated by the main Orthodox - has only recently been forgiven as a �misunderstanding� but not all Orthodox accept that.

The Patriarch of Jerusalem is being shunned for alleged land deals.

Which Orthodox church is heretical - today? - according to which other Orthodox church?? that changes from month to month.

Shall we say that Moscow is in unity with the Ecumenical Patriarch? Only if we have our heads in the sand.

Shall we say that the document posted at the Patriarch of Constantinople web site - accusing other Orthodox churches of breaking cannon and establishing churches in its territory - does not exist?

Shall we say that Moscow is in total agreement to turn over what property it gained at the point of communist guns - back to Greek Orthodox ownership - and its legal maneuvers in the World Court - against other Orthodox churches - does not exist??

Such pie in the sky �myth� of Orthodox unity - helps no one and hurts all.

Such misrepresentation of the kind of unity Rome desires between itself and Orthodoxy - assists nothing toward real unity.

Yes..' let us give it to yet another committe - and then ignore thier findings - Let�s not do anything real - but yak it up like we really intend to do something real - it is not our fault it is the fault of the other guy.

Perhaps God will fall for that.

Ms. Mathewes-Green happens to Be Orthodox� I would respond in the same manner if a Catholic gave similar reasons for continuing to shun his Orthodox brothers. Ms. Mathewes-Green is one of the continuing causes of division. Let her have her division.

Let others have brotherhood, love which strains for understanding of each - in Christ. Let us trust that Christ has been able to maintain the theological and sacementsal unity of his churches - as he said he would - despite its human members.

Let us put on the mind of Christ - and shake off the mind of Ms. Mathewes-Green.

-ray

Bless, Father Thomas!

I'll have my Cross underneath . . .

A three-bar Cross lapel pin, a prayer rope and some attitude . . .

That's how you'll recognize me

Hopefully, we'll meet.

Speaking to you in this thread reminds me of two beekeepers in the middle of a swarm of bees

I'll be meeting with Fr. Geoffrey Korz of Hamilton - we worked together in the government before he became Orthodox AND a priest.

He was the one who presented me to Met. Seraphim at his ordination and told him that I was the one who helped bring him to the OCA.

His Beatitude said, "Thank you, Alex, for bringing him to us."



I'll see you and the other "men in black" later!

Alex

The article does shed some light on barriers to unity - in an ironic way. Here is what the CCC says

Unity could be advanced by a little effort to understand rather than caricature each other's churches.

Much discussion over at open book:
http://amywelborn.typepad.com/openbook/