Ecumenical Patriarch To Attend Pope's Inaugural Mass

[Apotheoun]

For the first time since the Great Schism, ecumenical patriarch to attend pope's inaugural Mass

 

The metropolitans of Argentina and Italy will accompany Bartholomew. Moscow Patriarchate hopes in closer cooperation with Rome but excludes for now a meeting between Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill.

 

 

Istanbul (AsiaNews) - The Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I will attend Pope Francis's inaugural Mass. The Ecumenical Patriarchate Press Office informed AsiaNews about the decision, noting that this is the first time such an event occurs since the Catholic-Orthodox split in 1054, an important sign for Christian unity.

 

The ecumenical patriarch will be accompanied by Ioannis Zizioulas, metropolitan of Pergamon and co-president of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Church, as well as Tarassios, Orthodox Metropolitan of Argentina, and Gennadios, Orthodox Metropolitan of Italy.

 

Relations between Catholics and Orthodox have been improving since the Second Vatican Council through mutual visits, acts of friendship and theological dialogue.

 

Under Benedict XVI, the dialogue picked up in earnest after a lull. In trying to promote it, the pope suggested ways to express the primacy of Peter's successor that could be acceptable to the Orthodox, finding his inspiration from the undivided Church of the first millennium.

 

Catholic ecumenism has met however with great resistance from the Russian Orthodox Church and the Moscow Patriarchate, seat of the 'Third Rome'.

 

The head of the Russian Orthodox Church's Department for External Relations, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, said on Thursday that a meeting between the pope and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow was "possible but the place and timing will depend on how quickly we will overcome the consequences of the conflicts from the turn of 1980s and 1990s".

 

 

Click here to read the rest of the article on AsiaNews

[mortify]

I think this is great but I wonder what the aim is. Yes, I know it's "unity" but what does that mean exactly? Will the Orthodox accept us as we are or do we have to negate certain doctrines to trully be united with them? The Pope is the supreme authority even when compared to an Ecumenical Council, so how will we be able to draw closer to them? Seems like we have to accept our differences and admit that there will always be some division but that does not mean we can not work and pray together.

[Apotheoun]

I think this is great but I wonder what the aim is. Yes, I know it's "unity" but what does that mean exactly? Will the Orthodox accept us as we are or do we have to negate certain doctrines to trully be united with them? The Pope is the supreme authority even when compared to an Ecumenical Council, so how will we be able to draw closer to them? Seems like we have to accept our differences and admit that there will always be some division but that does not mean we can not work and pray together.

What it does not mean is that we are going to see the restoration of "full communion" between the Catholic Churches (Roman and Eastern) and the Eastern Orthodox Churches any time soon. I think his attendance at the Mass is meant to signify the willingness of the Orthodox Churches to work with Catholic Churches on issues of common purpose in the moral sphere, or in resisting the ongoing secularization of Western culture, but that is about it. In addition I think the Ecumenical Patriarch's decision to attend is meant to be a visible sign of respect for the bishop of Rome and the Roman Catholic Church.

 

That said, it is clear that the Eastern Orthodox (and the Oriental Orthodox) do not accept the notion that one bishop can have "supremacy" over other bishops, because according to Orthodox ecclesiology all bishops participate in one and the same mystery of holy orders making them all sacramentally equal.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Apotheoun

[KnightofChrist]

Peter is the elder brother, he has authority above the others.

[mortify]

What it does not mean is that we are going to see the restoration of "full communion" between the Catholic Churches (Roman and Eastern) and the Eastern Orthodox Churches any time soon. I think his attendance at the Mass is meant to signify the willingness of the Orthodox Churches to work with Catholic Churches on issues of common purpose in the moral sphere, or in resisting the ongoing secularization of Western culture, but that is about it. In addition I think the Ecumenical Patriarch's decision to attend is meant to be a visible sign of respect for the bishop of Rome and the Roman Catholic Church.

 

That said, it is clear that the Eastern Orthodox (and the Oriental Orthodox) do not accept the notion that one bishop can have "supremacy" over other bishops, because according to Orthodox ecclesiology all bishops participate in one and the same mystery of holy orders making them all sacramentally equal.

 

Apo, but it's accurate to say that "full communion" involves one side accepting the side of the other? In otherwords, Catholics becoming more Orthodox or Orthodox becoming more like Catholics.

[Apotheoun]

Peter is the elder brother, he has authority above the others.

As my Eastern Orthodox friends like to point out, Orthodoxy does not accept the notion that there is a separate sacrament of petrine succession. Moreover, Orthodox Christians believe that the bishops in general are successors of all the apostles, which necessarily includes St. Peter.

[Apotheoun]

Apo, but it's accurate to say that "full communion" involves one side accepting the side of the other? In otherwords, Catholics becoming more Orthodox or Orthodox becoming more like Catholics.

Yes, communion is by its very nature reciprocal, and it also involves each side accepting what has been believed always, everywhere, and by all. Consequently, innovations of any kind (theological or eccelsiological) must be rejected.

[Evangetholic]

Well "communion" with Rome implies believing what Rome believes. It requires conversion--not that Catholicism turn into Western Orthodoxy and deny defined dogmas as innovations.

[mortify]

Yes, communion is by its very nature reciprocal, and it also involves each side accepting what has been believed always, everywhere, and by all. Consequently, innovations of any kind (theological or eccelsiological) must be rejected.

 

And hence we have a problem since the organic developments guided by the Holy Ghost on one side, are regarded as innovations by the other. I appreciate the nice gestures between both sides but utlimately this is an issue God will have to resolve.

[mortify]

And just as an aside, why is the Patriarch of Constantinople still called "Ecumenical Patriarch"? Based on the origins of that title, and the fact that Constantinople is basically non existent, shouldn't the title be taken by another Bishop?

[Apotheoun]

And hence we have a problem since the organic developments guided by the Holy Ghost on one side, are regarded as innovations by the other.

Yes, Orthodox reject doctrinal development as understood in the West as a type of doctrinal evolution.  They see this approach exemplified in the creation of a new liturgy by the Roman Church's hierarchy at the end of the 1960s, which is a thing that no Orthodox Christian would ever accept as legitimate. To put it another way, Orthodox Christians do not believe that the faith changes over time, nor that it grows larger in the number of dogmas revealed by Christ. For Orthodox Christians there really are only two dogmas, i.e., the Trinity and the Incarnation. That said, I sincerely doubt that Roman Catholic apologists will ever convince the Orthodox to accept theological innovations and doctrinal developments, because that approach really is quite simply counter-intuitive to Orthodox sensibilities. Thus, to reiterate what I said in an earlier post, Orthodoxy does not see the idea of a universal bishop within tradition, nor does Orthodoxy contain the notion that one bishop has supremacy over another bishop. In fact the whole notion of supremacy - from an Orthodox perspective - smacks of the Gentile view of governance condemned by Christ the Lord Himself in the Gospel books.

 

As one of my Orthodox friends likes to say in connection with tradition and development: "Tradition is living, not because it is constantly changing, but because it is infused with the Holy Spirit, the giver of Life, who prevents the corruption of tradition from human innovation."

Edited March 16, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Evangetholic]

Catholic tradition doesn't change.It develops rather than being hidebound. Doctrines do not evolve into something alien to themselves--knowledge increases, substance does not change. We can see this in every dogma of the Christian faith including the dogmas the Separated Easterners accept.

 

The Tradition is alive. The Church (headed by the Pope in her earthly manifestation) is alive. The Trinity is alive.

 

No man may by right claim to possess Sacred Tradition separated from the Magisterium of the Church.

 

No man may by right claim to belong to the Church if he's separated from the visible means of her unity--the Papacy.

 

No man may claim the Trinitarian God apart from His Holy Church.

 

 

[Apotheoun]

And just as an aside, why is the Patriarch of Constantinople still called "Ecumenical Patriarch"? Based on the origins of that title, and the fact that Constantinople is basically non existent, shouldn't the title be taken by another Bishop?

I wrote a post some years ago at the Byzantine Forum that addresses the title "Ecumenical Patriarch" and what it actually means, and here is a portion of that post:

 

Westerners (even some popes) have ". . . misunderstood the nature of the title 'Ecumenical Patriarch' from the very beginning, because [they] thought that it meant 'universal bishop,' but it did not actually mean that to the Church in Constantinople; instead, it only meant that the Patriarch (and in fact any Patriarch) holds a position of honor within the household administration of his own Patriarchal Church, since he acts as a connection between his Patriarchate and the Ecumenical Council (i.e., whenever it is called into session)."

 

I should add to this quotation by saying that no one in Orthodoxy believes that the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew has "universal jurisdiction," which is why he cannot simply intervene in other patriarchal Churches. Furthermore it is important to note that Eastern Orthodox Christians do not believe that the offices of popes (either in Rome or Alexandria) or patriarchs are of divine institution. The patriarchates (i.e., groupings of Churches) are a matter of human custom, which is why each bishop within the different patriarchates remains the sole primate within his own eparchy, and why there must always be a holy synod (a gathering of the bishops from a specific patriarchate). In other words, the patriarch does not rule the patriarchate as some kind of all powerful monarch, but only has a directive function within the holy synod.

[Apotheoun]

. . . 

 

The Tradition is alive. The Church (headed by the Pope in her earthly manifestation) is alive. The Trinity is alive.

 

No man may by right claim to possess Sacred Tradition separated from the Magisterium of the Church.

Tradition is alive because it is infused with the Holy Spirit, and so it does not need to evolve through the creation of new dogmas in order to be alive. As far as the magisterium is concerned, Eastern Orthodoxy does not recognize that late medieval Western notion.  Orthodoxy teaches instead that every man, and not just the bishops, is charged with guarding holy tradition. To put it another way, the Western notion of a Church Teaching and a Church Taught is foreign to Orthodoxy, which perhaps why you have laymen (like St. Maximos) was willing (and able) to call bishops and patriarchs to task when they failed to teach the truth.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

. . . 

 

No man may claim the Trinitarian God apart from His Holy Church.

Eastern Orthodox Christians accept this idea too, but of course they would not agree with you about which Church is the true Church. Perhaps you should join an Orthodox forum and try to debate them on these issues, because there are very few Eastern Orthodox Christians at phatmass.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Apotheoun