skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Constantinople (RISU) — Patriarch Bartholomew considers the “double unity” of Greek Catholics impossible, which envisages simultaneous unity of Greek Catholics with Rome and Constantinople. A publication about the alleged support of Patriarch Bartholomew for this idea first appeared in a German source Каth.net, whose representatives interpreted the patriarch’s words in an interview with another German publication called Cyril and Methodius. The information from Kath.net was used by other media, including RISU.
On 5 July 2008, the Constantinople Patriarchate published the official disclaimer of this information. The statement says:
“Regarding the recent publications saying that His Holiness Universal Patriarch Bartholomew allegedly considers possible the ‘double unity’ of Greek Catholics (Uniates), their full communion with both Rome and Constantinople, The Universal Patriarchate hereby disclaims this as not true and does hereby reinstate its position that full unity in faith is the precondition for the communion in the sacraments.”
Recently, RISU also received the original text of Patriarch Bartholomew’s interview to the Cyril and Methodius magazine. The patriarch noted that with regard to the eastern Catholic Churches the mother Church keeps its door open; if they are willing to return, they can. Now that's a completely different statement isn't it. Reminds me of when National Geographic put out a long story filled with photos and commentary on a new archeological find that might "redefine Judas" as a sadly misunderstood apostle who was only acting on Christ's requests (forgive the icon to the right - yes that is an icon to Judas the Betrayer). A short time later a better translation comes out that re-vilifies him as "demon Judas." Mistranslations in Latin and Greek have caused confusion and outrage in the past and now media translation seems to be cause for similar reactions.
Posts
This gives me new hope on behalf of Constantinople. As an Orthodox Catholic Christian(wow, a tautology), the Patriarch really worries me.
ReplyDeleteOne of my favorite words (tautology). :) He worries you because he seems to move on his own ahead of the rest of Orthodoxy who prefer a slower and more careful pace with the Orthodox-Catholic dialogue?
ReplyDeleteSeveral reasons actually.
ReplyDeleteConstantinople is tricky for me.
I am ethincally Greek(both my parents are from the Old Country) so I "root" for Constantinople as being oppressed by the Turkish government and find a miracle in the fact the Patriarchate even exists today with what it has been through.
He worries me that the Ortodox World needs consolidation and healing and clarification and instead he finds reasons to talk to the Roman Catholic Church.
He espouses the "Sister Church" term coined by John Paul II. This makes many Orthodox Catholics uncomfortable. What exactly does he mean by this? He sows confusion for so many who have found the fullness of the Faith and its fulfillment in those Churches which hold the Orthodox Catholic Faith and by his actions he would seem to say that the Roman Catholic Church is just as valid. So these believers begin asking themselves, "Why be Orthodox if the "sister" is just as valid but is merely another expression of the Faith?
As well, he should perhaps reach out to the Old Calender groups as they are much closer in doctrine, ethos and make up than the Roman Church. The calender issue needs to be resolved.
I don't know if you have ever looked into this issue but if you have not, check this article out:
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/photii_1.aspx
It is a bit lenghty but well worth the read to learn some things about Constantinople (at least)since Patriarch Meletius Metaxakis (of sad memory) was enthroned.
This would of course tie into your knowledge, or lack of it, as to the nature of Freemasonry and its committed goals in the world.
The unilateral actions of Constantinople in other Patriarchates' affairs(specifically Russia's) causes much grief.
And when Russia behaves as an Orthodox nation, Constantinople is quick to point out how narrow and out of touch with the modern world Russia is.
Each of the above is of course a really quick answer to your question and each requires alot of fleshing out.
I hope it helped a bit for you to understand the side that is not keen on unifying the Orthodox Catholic Church with the Roman Catholic Church.
Many more points could be expressed and elaborated on.
Glad to see the blog getting some worthwhile discourse! Thanks for the comment.
ReplyDeletere: talking to Catholics instead of resolving intra-Orthodox problems
Metropolitan Philip (Antiochian) and Moscow have said the same thing. Granted that the Antiochans say it a tad more kindly.
re: Sister Church
A complicated issue as far as starting a dialogue wherein both sides feel they're coming to the table while being adequately respected. Simple if you consider the indivisible nature of the Church (i.e. there can only be one Church - one Body of Christ).
re: Orthodox Info article
I will certainly read it. That site is a wealth of information even if it occasionally places me in the undifferentiated darkness category in some articles.
re: the situation in general
Should the Catholic Church wait for Orthodoxy to settle its problems first before engaging in dialogue? Is history kind to the fabric of Orthodoxy being wholly in agreement in recent times? If it's ROC contra mundi should we wait for them to settle those battles before engagement?
re: Sister Church
ReplyDeleteA complicated issue as far as starting a dialogue wherein both sides feel they're coming to the table while being adequately respected. Simple if you consider the indivisible nature of the Church (i.e. there can only be one Church - one Body of Christ).
Ahh.. and therein lies the difference betweem our viewpoints:
As Rome has been changing througout the centuries has she remained the Catholic Church or has she become something else regardless of her callingherself the Catholic Church?
A deep question.