[Blacksheepaalredy]

Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I have renewed their appeals for Christian unity. Pope Benedict has said that Catholics and Orthodox have a common hope of seeing the day of unity draw near. He has also that said Christian unity is even more important in a world that is increasingly connected by technical means, but is unable to resolve its conflicts.
Patriarch Bartholomew has said there are still numerous difficulties in healing the 1000 rift between Catholic and Orthodox, but said both sides are working to overcome the obstacles.

How likely do you think it is that Catholics and Orthodox will reunite??

[Pete789]

I think the first thing we must establish is that when Patriarch Bartholomew meets with the Pope, he is meeting him on behalf of the Church of Constantinople, not the entire Orthodox Church. He is not an Eastern Pope. If the Orthodox Church were to enter into communion with the Roman Catholic Church it would have to be decided by all the local Orthodox Churches in a conciliar fashion. The second point that must be made that, yes, while there is much that unites us, there is much that divides us. There are significant dogmatic differences between the theologies of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches. These would include but are not limited to the RC understanding of Original Sin, the procession of the Holy Spirit, Papal Primacy, Papal Infallibility, Purgatory, and the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God, to name just a few. What also must become a focus of Orthodox and Roman Catholic dialogue is the Palamite controversy. Through an ecumenical council, not recognized by the RCC, the Orthodox Church declared the theology of Saint Gregory Palamas to be the theology of the Orthodox Church. As far as I have seen, there has been no discussion in such theological dialogues.

[Q0KmoR8K]

With God, all things are possible, but from the human standpoint, it's highly improbable. I just don't see Rome being able to renounce the many errors that separate her from the Church, so a mass conversion is unlikely. There is more hope in individuals or parishes becoming Orthodox one by one.

[Toossehew]

Seventy-five years ago, no one would have ever dreamed, Catholic or Orthodox, of the reconciliations, love, and Christ pleasing steps to reunification which we see today by the grace of God.
All things are possible with God...who has many holy people in His kingdom from both churches, I am sure! :-)
Even if we are not unified in praxis and dogma, and even if we are not unified in communion, many of us are unified in our hearts in love for Christ and the Theotokos, and in our witness for Christian values in an ever increasing pagan world on the one front, and Islam encroaching on the other. We see this also this Christ inspired need for unified witness in our Orthodox hierarchs from Russia to the United States.
May the Holy Spirit continue to guide all talks, commissions and meetings between our clerics, hierarchs ...and may we all have love in our hearts for each other.
In Christ our Lord and Saviour,
Alice

[ButKnillinoi]

Which is more important? Unity or Truth?

[Suentiend]

Which is more important? Unity or Truth?

In an historic Christian sense, those who would abide in the Holy Trinity, through the Son, cannot divide Unity from Truth. To ask which is more important is a nonsensical question for the one(s) who would abide in the Father through the Son by means of the Spirit.


Which is more important? Orthodoxy or Truth?

Which is more important? Orthodoxy or Unity?

[limpoporanique]

Only in Christ's truth can there be real unity.

Start the other way around (which is a real temptation nowadays) and Christ gradually recedes.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Suentiend]

Only in Christ's truth can there be real unity.

I think this is something that all Christians can agree with. But, then again there is that little matter of who it is that prescribes and subscribes to Christ's truth in terms of a visable/tangible unity.

[ButKnillinoi]

In an historic Christian sense, those who would abide in the Holy Trinity, through the Son, cannot divide Unity from Truth. To ask which is more important is a nonsensical question for the one(s) who would abide in the Father through the Son by means of the Spirit.


Which is more important? Orthodoxy or Truth?

Which is more important? Orthodoxy or Unity?

OK, it was a trick question. We call ourselves Orthodox Christians. The very meaning of Ortho-doxa is "right-worship" or "correct-doctrine" or "true-belief" or any combination thereof, therefore we obviously believe that Orthodoxy=correct/full knowledge of the Truth which is Christ the Lord. Any move towards unity that appears to compromise the teachings of the Church is not going to be seen favorably by a large segment of that Church.

The RC Church seems to have a much looser standard of Truth, since things like the filioque are now "optional" and recognition of the authority of the Vatican seems to get a greater emphasis than actual teachings (since "eastern catholics" appear to get a pass on otherwise "required" Catholic doctrines).

Orthodoxy seems less willing to allow such wiggle room, is that wrong? Seems like a sliding scale, with Orthodoxy at one end, Catholicism in the middle and Anglicanism at the other end (can anyone definitively say what the Anglican church teaches at this point on just about any topic?). And of course Protestant churches are all over the map, not what the Apostle Paul had in mind when he stressed we should be "of one mind", donchathink?

Herman the "unity in Truth" advocating Pooh

[ButKnillinoi]

I think this is something that all Christians can agree with. But, then again there is that little matter of who it is that prescribes and subscribes to Christ's truth in terms of a visable/tangible unity.

Those who are visibly and tangibly in union define who prescribes that Truth. Bit of a conundrum, eh what?

Herman the conundrumming Pooh

[Blacksheepaalredy]

We know that Jesus cares about Church unity and that He would like us to be "one flock"

John 10:16 I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

But we failed Him on this one, the East and the West. We failed, in 1054, him for political reasons and not about the "truth".

In any event, we can have full communion without having to agree on all doctrinal issues. To this day I do not understand why a well meaning Catholic that wants to take communion in an Orthodox Church is not allowed to do so. After all, Catholics and Orthodox do have the same understanding about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and Orthodox are allowed to participate in the Sacraments of the Catholic Church, including the Eucharist and Confession.

[Suentiend]

. . . eh what?

Eh what?

I don't know Herman, if we stay in the realm of "groups" of Christians this can be turned around different ways, no problem. But, when I use the pronoun "who" as I have meant it to be read as singular, then I don't think it is such a *simple* thing at all.

It occurs to me know to make the plea for writing from the fathers and saints that might speak to this aspect of the individual in his direct and responsible relationship with God, but . . . I would think what I have suggested above is taken for granted by these writers. This is starting to remind me of a conversation I had in a thread with Ryan ('The Realm of Truth'). I was writing with individuals in mind (regardless of their labels), he was writing of particular groups of people (with specific labels.)

This seemed to provide a great barrier to dialogue in that thread. Ryan didn't want to talk to me in terms of individuals because it was considered too abstract, if I remember correctly.

But, it is interesting to me to see his post above now:

With God, all things are possible, but from the human standpoint, it's highly improbable. I just don't see Rome being able to renounce the many errors that separate her from the Church, so a mass conversion is unlikely. There is more hope in individuals or parishes becoming Orthodox one by one.

You know brother Pooh, as it relates to the mystery of the Bride of Christ, how can it be anything other than one by one?

[MP+4]

Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I have renewed their appeals for Christian unity. Pope Benedict has said that Catholics and Orthodox have a common hope of seeing the day of unity draw near. He has also that said Christian unity is even more important in a world that is increasingly connected by technical means, but is unable to resolve its conflicts.
Patriarch Bartholomew has said there are still numerous difficulties in healing the 1000 rift between Catholic and Orthodox, but said both sides are working to overcome the obstacles.

How likely do you think it is that Catholics and Orthodox will reunite??

I see their still trying to rescue europe from europeans instead of strengthening their churches.

[MP+4]

We know that Jesus cares about Church unity and that He would like us to be "one flock"

John 10:16 I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

But we failed Him on this one, the East and the West. We failed, in 1054, him for political reasons and not about the "truth".

In any event, we can have full communion without having to agree on all doctrinal issues. To this day I do not understand why a well meaning Catholic that wants to take communion in an Orthodox Church is not allowed to do so. After all, Catholics and Orthodox do have the same understanding about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and Orthodox are allowed to participate in the Sacraments of the Catholic Church, including the Eucharist and Confession.

Dear Angelos,

John 10.16 is speaking of the jews and the future inclusion of the gentiles. Christ is simply saying that the gentiles are also included in salvation. The church cannot fail, there is only a falling away from the Church, not parts or sections of it. When Christ was crucified not a bone of Him was broken. The Body is not fractured. If one wants christian unity then he should join the Church and finally be united to His Body and not disunited.. Having full communion without dogmatic unity is the pan- heresy of ecumenism. In fact i cant even think of any Orthodox ecumenist who has gone that far, even they would denounce that kind of runaway ecumenism. There is one holy catholic and apostolic church, and that is the church of the Fathers, the Orthodox Church, there simply is no other.

[Matajic]

Which is more important? Orthodoxy or Truth?

Which is more important? Orthodoxy or Unity?

No!

INXC, Fr Irenei

[Suentiend]

No!

Is this a trick answer?

[Matajic]

No.... it is a refusal to allow that the questions are valid or sensible. Which was, I suppose your point in your post.

INXC, Fr Irenei

[Suentiend]

Your supposition is correct Father.

The word I used in my post was "nonsensical."

[jeaccatty]

In any event, we can have full communion without having to agree on all doctrinal issues. To this day I do not understand why a well meaning Catholic that wants to take communion in an Orthodox Church is not allowed to do so. After all, Catholics and Orthodox do have the same understanding about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and Orthodox are allowed to participate in the Sacraments of the Catholic Church, including the Eucharist and Confession.

No, we cannot have full communion without agreement on the truth. Unity is the result of our agreement, not the cause of it. We see this in the structure of the Liturgy itself for before the anaphora can take place we must proclaim that we are of one faith (the Nicene Creed - the declaration of the our faith which was changed by Rome in such a manner that the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is challenged). If we do not have a unity of faith, then any sacramental unity is false. Thus, for the Roman Catholic confession to enter into sacramental unity with the Orthodox Church, she must first repudiate her errors and enter into doctrinal unity. Rome's definition of unity of faith is focused not on the teaching of the Church but rather on the person of the Pope (you can pretty much disagree with the rest of Roman Catholic teaching as long as you recognize the Pope as the supreme authority of the Church). This is a false unity although it masquerades as a kind of unity because, "Orthodox are allowed to participate in the sacraments of the Catholic (sic) Church". In fact, all this kind of false unity does is invite Orthodox Christians to join in the errors of the Roman Catholic confession, it does not bring the Roman Catholic confession out of its errors and into the Truth.

Sacramental unity does not produce doctrinal unity - rather we must have a unity of faith before any other unity is possible.

Fr David Moser

[Piemonedmow]

We can have unity without Truth, but it would not be Christian unity. Rather, it ould be unity in something else.

The sentiment expressed above that we can all hold each other in love and that we can together work for the common social good is itself not objectionable and I don' think that any of us would wish to contest thst. This seems to be the official position of the Russian Orthodox Church as expressed here, and was affirmed by both the Church in Russia and ROCOR as part of the preparation for the reunion.

However, this is not what saves us.

Unity in the Church - in the Body of Christ - comes from that common life, common Faith, and common Baptism that grafts us into Christ. It is no accident that the disciples were said to have "continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." (Acts 2:42). These things are intrinsicaly bound together. Where the Apostle's teaching has been abandoned, where that fellowship has been severed, there can be no common breaking of bread and no common prayer. This is the witness of Scripture, the Fathers, the Canons, and the Church's liturgical practice.

In any discussion about Christian unity, we must remember that the Church is already united. By definition, it cannot be otherwise. The Church is, by its nature, a communion, reflecting in some way the communion of the Holy and Undivided Trinity, and drawing us into such communion as part of our ongoing theosis. Therefore, it cannot embrace heresy and division within itself. To suggest otherwise is to suggest that the Trinity is divided, and I leave it to our more theologically-minded contributors to explore the doctrinal problems with that sort of ecclesiology.

It is, however, possible to be separated from the Church, and this is the state of the heterodox. This is how we must approach any discussionof unity, not with a view to uniting with heresy but in order to show before those who believe differently the Truth of the life in Christ, that they may wish to also become united with his Body, the Church for the sake of their salvation. I cannot express this better than the ROCOR synod:

Preserving faith in the One, Holy, Universal and Apostolic Church, the Synod of Bishops affirms that the Church never divided itself. The question lies only in who belongs to her and who does not. At the same time, the Synod of Bishops fervently welcomes all attempts of the heterodox to study Christ's teaching on the Church in the hope that through this study, especially with the participation of representatives of the Holy Orthodox Church, they will ultimately come to the conclusion that the Orthodox Church, as the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15), fully and without error preserved the teaching handed down by Christ the Savior (sic) to His disciples."