[thomaskkk]

I came across this article while browsing orthodoxnews.com. It is an article that was originally published on the Fordham University website. The part that I find most interesting will be bolded.

"The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches should own up to their past misdeeds and work to restore communion, according to a Jesuit liturgical expert.

Robert F. Taft, S.J., a former professor of Eastern liturgy at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome, said that the rift between the churches was sustained primarily by offensive actions—not theological differences.

"The main problem that we Catholics and Orthodox face in our ecumenical dialogue is not doctrine but behavior," Father Taft said. "The issue is not that Catholics and Orthodox do not know how to pray and believe and live Christianity in the right and true apostolic way. The problem is that we do not know how to act."

Father Taft delivered "Perceptions and Realities in Orthodox-Catholic Relations Today," on June 28 at the Rose Hill campus.

He pointed to Catholic "uniatism"—aggression against another church—as a major problem blocking fruitful dialogue between the religions. He added that although the Orthodox faith has been victimized, it also refuses to admit its own misdeeds.

"Western Christianity’s historic defects of imperialism, power and domination led to the crimes for which Pope John Paul II asked pardon in Rome on the first Sunday of Lent in 2000," Father Taft said. "Metropolitan Kallinikos of Piraeus—an official spokesman of the Orthodox Church of Greece—responded … by declaring there was nothing for which Orthodoxy had to ask pardon."

Father Taft advocated a system of "ecumenical scholarship and theology"—a new way to study Christian tradition that seeks to reconcile and unite, rather than to confute and dominate. To accomplish this, the Catholic and Orthodox churches must recognize one another as historic apostolic sister churches, he said.

"For Catholics, such an 'ecumenical theology' must mean an end to declarations on the nature of the priesthood that exalt the celibate clerical state of the Latin tradition in a way that is demeaning to the thousands of legitimately married eastern clergy," he said.

"It might also mean Catholic theologians realizing that Latin scholastic theology of the Eucharist is 'a' theology and not 'the' theology."

The point of this new ecumenical theology is not that Catholics and Orthodox never disagree. "What it does mean, is that at the official level, disagreements can be discussed truthfully and courteously, without invective, rudeness and slander," Father Taft said.

His was the first keynote at "Orthodox Constructions of the West," a three-day conference that examined how Orthodox authors created artificial categories of "East" and "West" and then used that distinction as a basis for self-definition.

The event was supported by the Patterson Triennial Conference Endowment for Orthodox/Catholic Relations as well as several units at Fordham University, including the Center for Medieval Studies and Orthodox Christian Studies Program."

[popsicesHoupe]

The part I find interesting is:

Father Taft advocated a system of "ecumenical scholarship and theology"—a new way to study Christian tradition that seeks to reconcile and unite, rather than to confute and dominate. To accomplish this, the Catholic and Orthodox churches must recognize one another as historic apostolic sister churches, he said. That's going to fly like a lead balloon in much - if not most - of the EO world. And I think the theological differences are much more important than he admits. However, despite that, his points about offensive actions do have merit.

[biannaruh]

What the Orthodox Church teaches and proclaims is expressed in its liturgical services, and, in visual form, in its icons. Individual fathers may well contradict each other (even saints are not infallible), but the liturgical material is the distillation, the essence, the core of scripture, patristic writings, of Apostolic teachings, and other accepted sources such as the ecumenical councils. Even the prayers in an Orthodox prayer book are stuffed full of scripture, they are not merely "the words of men". Liturgics and iconography are the most accessible and clearest means what the whole Orthodox Church espouses and proclaims, irrespective of geographic location or jurisdiction. Lex orandi, lex credendi.

I find the statement "a new way to study Christian tradition that seeks to reconcile and unite, rather than to confute and dominate" quite meaningless. Any attempt to dilute or tamper with the integrity and content of Orthodox doctrine and theology, particularly that which is so clearly, and for so long in our history, expressed in our liturgical and iconographic tradition, must be resisted at all costs. What separates the church of Rome from Orthodoxy is not mere theologoumena (considered pious opinions), but doctrinal and dogmatic matters of fundamental importance.

The good Fr Taft means well, but has, sadly, misunderstood the situation.

[thomaskkk]

This also caught my intention. Were there any Orthodox representatives at this conference? What were the other speakers talks about? Oh, and love how Orthodox authors created artificial categories of East and West.....puh-lease.

His was the first keynote at "Orthodox Constructions of the West," a three-day conference that examined how Orthodox authors created artificial categories of "East" and "West" and then used that distinction as a basis for self-definition.

[ButKnillinoi]

What we have here is another complete failure to begin to understand the Orthodox Church. I find Fr. Taft's comments extremely condescending.

I have three sisters. If I try to group them in to some artificial superset of "female siblings" and call THAT my "sister", then I am doing what Fr. Taft is attempting to do with the Orthodox Churches. He is basically grouping random words into proper sentences and using proper grammar. Although they vaguely resemble cogent thoughts, they are ultimately meaningless. Let's just kiss and make up and ignore the elephant in the sanctuary.

To "accept" the Roman Church means accepting Papal perogatives of infallibility (however one chooses to define it and no two Catholics seem to define it in the same manner) and supremecy, unless the Vatican specifically chooses to renounce them. Until that happens there can be no "unity", plain and simple no matter how many happy little platitudes and obfuscations you throw out there.

Herman the "eschew obfuscation" Pooh

[thomaskkk]

This was a much earlier conference held by some members of the Orthodox Church, I think primarily Greece, and this is what came from the symposium.

"Papal ‘primacy' has no theological foundation, no legitimacy from the Holy Spirit and no ecclesiological legitimacy. It is clearly based on a worldly understanding of authority." This, among other things, was the conclusion of the theological conference which was organized by the Holy Metropolis of Piraeus in the Peace and Friendship Stadium (Melina Mercouri Hall) on 28 April 2010, and which was a success with many clergy and laity present.
The conference was also honored by the presence of His Beatitude Hieronymos, Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, who also started the conference off. Also present were: His Eminence Seraphim, Metropolitan of Kythira; Pavlos, Metropolitan of Glyfada; and Melito, Bishop of Marathon.

The topic "Primacy," Synodicality and Unity of the Church was expounded upon in two sessions with seven speakers: His Eminence Seraphim, Metropolitan of Piraeus, Hieromonk Luke Grigoriatis, Prof. Aristidis Papadakis (University of Maryland), Protopresbyter George Metallinos, Protopresbyter Theodore Zisis, Protopresbyter Anastasios Gotsopoulos and Prof. Dimitrios Tselengidis.

From the presentations and the discussion that followed, it was concluded that: unity belongs to the nature of the Church as it is the body of Christ and communion in Him. The true Church is one. The unity of the Church in all its interpretations - structural or charismatic (grace-bearing) - clearly has its foundation in the Holy Spirit. It is extended mystically, but is maintained, fostered and apparent chiefly through holy communion.

According to the "Confession of Faith" of the Synod of Constantinople in 1727, "Therefore no other head whatsoever is accepted in this Eastern Church, save only our Lord Jesus Christ, from the Father given to the whole Church and its foundation." According to Orthodox ecclesiology, "primate" is not meant generally and indefinitely without the presence of the particular synod of a region.

The concept of a rank of honor (that is the term which Orthodox ecclesiastical tradition uses opposed to the subsequent term "primacy" that the papists use) expresses and ensures the unity and the synodicality of the Orthodox Catholic Church. The pentarchy of the patriarchal thrones is the form which the Church gave to the concept of a rank of honor during the first millennium.

The authority of the "primate," which derives from the rank of honor, is a fruit of synodicality, while the authority the bishop of Rome had already started to appropriate during the first millennium is a result of the abolition of the synodical organization of the Church.

In the Church of the first millennium there was no papal primacy "by divine right" in jurisdiction or authority over the whole Church. On the contrary, the Church had the right to make decisions about its administration without the Pope, even in spite of his strong opposition, and these decisions were universally valid.

After the schism of 1054, the increasing claim of the popes for primacy of authority over the whole Church completely subverted the structure of the mystical body of the Church inspired by the Holy Spirit. It makes synodicality (as a function of this body inspired by the Holy Spirit) relative - practically abolishing it - and introduces the worldly mindset to it. It nullifies the equality of bishops, misappropriates the complete administrative authority of the whole Church, essentially setting aside the Theanthropos (the God-Man) and making a man the visible head of the Church. In this way the ancestral sin is repeated in this institution.

True unity takes place when there is unity in faith, in worship, and administration. This is the model of unity in the ancient Church, which the universal Orthodox Church continues unchanged. Unia introduces a false unity and is based on a heretical ecclesiology, since it allows different forms of the faith and worship, and makes unity contingent on the recognition of the primacy of the pope, which is an institution of human justice, and undermines the synodical structure of the administration of the Church, which is an institution of divine justice. Multiformity is only acceptable in secondary matters of local traditions and customs.

After the First Vatican Council (1870) and especially the Second Vatican Council (1962-1964) papal primacy does not comprise a simple administrative assertion, but an essential dogma of faith absolutely necessary for the salvation of the faithful. Its denial incurs the anathema of the First Vatican Council, whose validity remains still after the Second Vatican Council.

As the host of the conference Metropolitan Seraphim of Piraeus emphasized in his introduction, "Due to the heretical and blasphemous doctrine of the primacy of the bishop of Rome and the spiritual ramifications which come from it (such as the "infallibility" of the Pope and his autocratic-monarchic despotism over the whole body of the religious community under him), Papism has developed into an autocratic-monarchic system of mystic ideology and perversion of the meaning of the Church. It has proven to be modern Roman-Frank ethnicism (paganismus) in a spiritual disguise, has taken away the mystical freedom in Christ of each of [the Church's] members and has turned out to be the inevitable and fateful cause of the falling away from the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church into hundreds of different heresies, and an insurmountable obstacle to their possible return."

At the assessment of the participants of the current theological dialogue between Orthodox and Roman-Catholics, its attempt at the restoration of ecclesiastical communion must somehow - beyond the elimination of the heretical teachings of Rome (Filioque, created grace, infallibility, purgatory, etc.) - aim also at the definite elimination of papal primacy and not at some commonly acceptable interpretation of it.

Finally, the syncretistic framework of "unity in diversity" is considered unacceptable and cannot become acceptable as "a model for the restoration of full communion."

source

[thomaskkk]

This is a quote from Met. Kallistos Ware from a Catholic News Service interview he did back in February. I think the last line, his comment, is exactly what needs to be done, "In order to go forward,” he said, “we have to look back."