Disintegration and reconciliation

The very problem of Christian reconciliation is not that of a correlation of parallel traditions, but precisely that of the reintegration of a distorted tradition.  The two traditions may seem quite irreconcilable, when they are compared and confronted, as they are at the present.  Yet their differences themselves are, to a great extent, simply the results of disintegration: they are, as it were, distinctions stiffened into contradictions.

– Fr. Georges Florovsky, “The Ethos of the Orthodox Church” (an address to the World Council of Churches given in 1960); emphasis in original

From Torn Notebook

More catching up …

I was out of town again last week and came back to find an interesting combox discussion of what “modernity” is and how the Church ought to engage it. As always, the most valuable aspect of this blog is the discussion from readers, and yours truly is merely a facilitator.

I’m also catching up with some Orthodox-Catholic related posts from my RSS feed:

• Somewhat apropos to the aforementioned discussion, from the blog “a … sinner” via Fr Gregory Jensen: “Throne and altar” making a comeback in Russia. Fr Gregory comments here.
• From the blog of the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome comes news of the Romanian Church’s decision to “forgive” Metropolitan Nicolae (Corneanu) of Banat for receiving Holy Communion in a Romanian Catholic Church on May 25.
• Fr Robert Hart, Anglican priest and brother to Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart, has written a post dealing with Original Sin in Eastern and Western Christian thought.
• Wei-Hsien Wan writes on why he considers himself a Zoghbyite.
• Dr Michael Liccione presents three quotes – from Gregory Nazianzen, Vincent of Lerins, and Vatican II’s Dei Verbum – illustrating the development of the notion of doctrinal development. He also explains what he regards as the proper use and limitations of the famous Vincentian Canon (which many Anglicans and Orthodox use polemically against Rome).

Theology, Liturgy and Silence

Thanks to the blog Diligite Iustitiam, here’s a link to the Ecumenical Patriarch’s recent lecture at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome, entitled “Theology, Liturgy and Silence.”

Zizioulas on Love for Unity and the Russian Church

A Love for ‘Orthodox - Catholic Unity’

Metropolitan Zizioulas talks about the isolation of the Russian Orthodox Church who, in name of tradition, finds itself unable to face the modern world.

By NAT da Polis
7/7/2008
Asia News (www.asianews.it/)

[Original story here]

ROME (AsiaNews) - A great love for Catholic-Orthodox unity as the only way to face the challenges of the modern world and a profound sadness for the self-imposed isolation of the Russian Orthodox Church are the main points Ecumenical Greek-Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew I raised in his address to the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome. 

They are also the main thrust in Metropolitan of Pergamon Ioannis Zizioulas’ comments to AsiaNews about the patriarch’’s speech. 

For the latter the attitude of the Russian Orthodox Church is one of “conservatism,” showing an inability to meet “the challenges of the modern world.” 

Bartholomew I was invited to Rome for the 90th anniversary of the Institute, an institution that includes the well-known Faculties of Eastern Church Studies and Eastern Canon Law. 

The Patriarch spoke about what the Orthodox Church expects from this institution as service to the contemporary world. In his inaugural lecture titled “Theology, Liturgy, and Silence: Fundamental Insights from the Eastern Fathers for the Modern World”, he stressed the importance to the theology of the great Fathers of the Church, those of the united Church of the first millennium, whose spirit lives on as a solid basis for the document elaborated in Ravenna, which is the Sister Churches’ response to the challenges of the contemporary world. 

What word of salvation can the Eastern Church’’s theology bring to the modern world? To this initial question, Bartholomew answered by starting with Patristic theology, explaining that such a theology cannot be reduced to a structured system of truth, but is on the contrary the light and grace of the Holy Spirit which gives life to the whole Church and thus “rejuvenates the entire world.”

A theology that is cut off from Church and society is “a sterile study of doctrinal formulations, rather than a deifying vision of conviction and commitment, capable of transforming the whole world.” 

During the Age of Byzantium, so reviled because misunderstood, when religious life encompassed every aspect of secular life, “when “[t]heological culture embraced every aspect,”” he said, “every “manifestation, activity, institution, intuition, and literary achievement in Byzantine society [. . .] the Church Fathers were primarily pastors, not philosophers.” 

“They were concerned first with reforming the human heart and transforming society, not with refining concepts or resolving controversies.” For the patriarch the fundamental aspects of Patristic thought can enlighten theology in the modem age.” 

Liturgy 

First of all, the Fathers of the Church never saw theology as a monopoly of the professional academic or the official hierarchy. “Theology,” Bartholomew I noted, “was a communal experience or as St Paul put it, a way “to bring to light [for all] what is the plan of the mystery hidden from ages past in God” (Eph, 3:9).”

Again this background it is the Church which guarantees the Apostolic Age’s normative continuity, from Patristic times till now. And when the Church prays as a liturgical assembly it is truly itself. 

Thanks to this liturgical aspect Eastern Christians were given courage under the Ottoman Empire and more recently under post-Revolutionary Russia. “This profound sense of community must, therefore, also characterize our theological perception of the world today. This means that no individual can ever exhaust the fullness of truth in isolation from others, outside the communion of saints.” 

The Patriarch also spoke about Catholic-Orthodox dialogue. “With regard to fraternal relations among our Sister Churches, “[if] the two lungs of the Eastern and Western Churches [. . .] must breathe in harmony, [n]either should assume provocative initiatives— - whether unilaterally or universally - —in its ministry to God’’s people.””

“Finally, “[w]e urge you to serve the theological word by breathing the air of theology and kneeling humbly before the living Creator”,” Bartholomew said, invitng the Pontifical Oriental Institute to “play a decisive role in the rapprochement between the East and the West.” 

Russian Orthodoxy’’s insularity 

The Metropolitan of Pergamon Ioannis Zizioulas, an eminent Orthodox theologian, spoke with AsiaNews about the difficult ecumenical path with the Russian Orthodox Church. 

This comes just a day after a representative of the Moscow Patriarchate advised Orthodox believers not to pray with members of other Christian confessions. 

“In the Eastern Church, especially in the Russian Church, there is a degree of insularity that leads to conservatism. There is an inability to face the challenges of the modern world, with tradition as an excuse,” Metropolitan Ioannis said. 

The prelate, who accompanied the Patriarch Bartholomew to Rome where he met Benedict XVI today, said that “the true value of tradition is only reached when we can reshape our tradition. Tradition as the Christian Church’s message does not mean doing nothing; instead it contains truth’s momentum and does not fear the challenge of the contemporary world.” 

In Ravenna (Italy) last October the Joint Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church resumed its work even though there were no representatives from the Moscow Patriarchate. The latter chose not to attend because of the presence of representatives of the Estonian Orthodox Church which Moscow does not recognise. 

Correction from the Phanar

Fr Gregory Jensen has posted this Press Release from the Ecumenical Patriarchate:

With respect to the recently published articles reporting that allegedly His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew believes that it is possible for the Greek Catholics (Uniates) to have a “double union”, in other words, full communion with Rome as well as with Constantinople, the Ecumenical Patriarchate refutes this inaccurate statement and affirms it was never made.  The Ecumenical Patriarchate repeats its position that full union in faith is a prerequisite for sacramental communion.

At the Patriarchate, the 5th of July 2008
From the Chief Secretariat of the Holy Synod

This, of course, makes complete sense, whereas the early reports definitely did not. Both Catholics and Orthodox believe firmly that unity in matters of faith must be accomplished before there is full communion. Now, I’d still like to know what exactly Bartholomew said that was so misconstrued by the original reporter.

Catching up …

I’ve been out of town for several days, and I returned yesterday evening to find all sorts of interesting blog posts in my RSS feed.

First, a very sad post from Dr Peter Gilbert at De unione ecclesiarum, announcing his intention to suspend his blog (for the time being?). I appreciate his kind words about this blog, and I look forward to reading his published work on John Bekkos.

For all of you Zoghbyites out there (which I can’t say that I am, though I am intrigued by his writings and career), Wei-Hsien Wan of Torn Notebook is posting the late Archbishop’s own explanation of his concept of “double communion” between the Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch:

• Part One – I Love the Roman Church; I Also Love the Orthodox Church
• Part Two – Acts of Rupture; Acts of Communion
• Part Three – My Project of Double Communion; Negative Reactions from Rome
• Part Four – Reflections on the Roman Response
• Part Five – Reflections on the Roman Response (continued)
• Part Six – The People of God Want Unity and Try to Live It; In All Conscience: No to Schism

Father Zuhlsdorf has the text of the sermons of Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew delivered last Sunday at the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul in Rome, the inauguration of the Pauline Year.

Sandro Magister, of Chiesa magazine, explains the Pauline Year as an expression of “the ecumenical dream of Pope Benedict”, with the stated objective “to create the unity of the ‘catholica’, of the Church formed from Jews and pagans, of the Church of all peoples.”

Fr Gregory Jensen of Koinonia has just completed a monumental eight post series on the psychology of polemics (specifically, Orthodox-Catholic polemics). I am so grateful to Fr Gregory for his unique perspective as both an Orthodox priest and a psychologist. Wisdom, let us attend!

• Part One – What Grace Doesn’t Do
• Part Two – Tradition and the Passions
• Part Three – Polemics, Zeal and St Isaac the Syrian
• Part Four – “Sanctify Those Who Love the Beauty of Your House” (I)
• Part Five – ”Sanctify Those Who Love the Beauty of Your House” (II)
• Part Six – Neurosis Isn’t Necessarily Bad
• Part Seven – Toward & Away; Against & With
• Part Eight – An Anthropology of Reconciliation
• Part Nine - “For I Desire Mercy and Not Sacrifice”

I also see that Fr Gregory has added the quote by Gregory Nazianzus from Dr Gilbert’s last post: “Not to everyone, friends, does it belong to philosophize about God, not to everyone; the subject is not so cheap and low. And, I will add, not before every audience, nor at all times, nor on all points; but on certain occasions, and before certain persons, and within certain limits.” Every Christian blogger should have this quote printed in bold letters and framed above their computers, alongside an icon print of Saint Gregory the Theologian, and perhaps also of Saint Thomas Aquinas (who also knew when to shut his mouth in silent adoration).

I am flattered that two of my posts have been mentioned in “Patristic Carnival XIII” hosted at The God Fearin’ Forum.

And finally, a humorous but admiring tribute to the Eastern Orthodox knack for naming holy stuff, from the “Random Things the Orthodox Do So Much Better Than Us” File over at the Shrine of the Holy Whapping.
 

Pistevo eis ena Theon

Listen to Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew recite the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 together in Greek (thanks to Fr Z).

When theology becomes ideology

… [T]he reading of history that you have taken on from Joseph Farrell, that I think constitutes an ideology, in fact resembles, theoretically and rhetorically, the ideology of those who gave fuel to the Bosnian war. It presents a discourse wherein the West is conceived to have fallen from divine grace, and the chief villain of the story is St. Augustine. It is to his “dialectic” of divine simplicity, which you see as fundamentally akin to that of Eunomius, that you ascribe the manifold problems of the West. It may well be that you accord Augustine some credit as an honest Christian; but his thinking you consistently represent as heresy, “Sabellianism” or “Semi-Sabellianism.” When I say that this is an ideology, I mean that it is maintained only through a kind of willful disregard of Christian history. It presents a caricature view of both the West and the East, a caricature that arises from an impatience with looking at facts. Neither the East, nor certainly the West, was ever as monolithically Photian in its understanding of the trinitarian mystery as you make it out to be. That is one of the things, in writing this blog, that I have tried to show.

That impatience with looking at facts has serious consequences for Christian relations. The West is asked to renounce its own past, to take on a view of God that never really belonged to it. I do think that this is a kind of destruction of memory, implicitly a kind of violence, and that the West rightly rejects such a demand. And I know that theoretical violence often issues in the physical kind.

This is not to say that the West never perpetrated violence on the East, both theoretical and physical. And it is right that the theoretical and physical causes of violence be acknowledged and renounced on both sides. But my consistent claim throughout this blog has been that people like the Cappadocians, St. Athanasius, St. Maximus, and other fathers of the Church were constantly aware of the dangers of Christian misunderstanding, dangers of violence, and that they sought to obviate those dangers by perceiving, if at all possible, the underlying commonality of doctrine when there was a verbal disagreement. I think that that is what St. Maximus does in his Letter to Marinus. And I am pretty certain that the underlying commonality of doctrine St. Maximus defends in that letter allows for the orthodoxy of St. Augustine’s teaching on the Holy Trinity, in spite of what is said by Anastasius the Librarian.

In short, I think that Bekkos is a better reader of the patristic evidence than Photius is. It may be that you think such an acknowledgment is inconsistent with belonging to the Orthodox Church. Perhaps you are right; God is judge. But I have a great hesitation to leave Orthodox discourse entirely in the hands of those who are impatient with fact, and who thereby disallow the possibility of any Christian reconciliation from the outset …

– Peter Gilbert

Update (6/30/2008) – A new post at De unione ecclesiarum: “On exclusive truth-claims; or, What I Believe”

Opening of the ‘Pauline Year’ in Rome

The New Liturgical Movement has some lovely video screencaps from this evening’s Solemn Papal Vespers at the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls in Rome. The Pope has an extremely important guest this evening: His Holiness, Bartholomew I, Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople! There are some particularly moving pictures (here and here) of the Successor of Saint Peter and the Successor of Saint Andrew the First-Called praying before the tomb of Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles. Some video of the event may be viewed here.

Rejoice, Holy Chief Apostles Peter and Paul!

AKATHIST TO SAINTS PETER AND PAUL

KONDAK I

Of Himself our Lord said, I am the Good Shepherd and to you, the Chief Apostle Peter, He said, If you love Me, feed My Sheep, and Peter said, Yes, Lord, You know that I love you. I am Jesus, He said, in speaking to you, O Paul, Chief Apostle, and of you, our Lord said, This is my chosen instrument to carry my Name before the Gentiles. Jesus said to both your fellow disciples and to His Apostles, As my Father sent me, so I have sent you. Go and make disciples of all nations. You have a like Grace from the Good Pastor, your Master, as after our Lord, the Great and Chief Pastor of all. From all our troubles for shepherding unto salvation save us that we may call to you:

• Rejoice Holy Chief Apostles Peter and Paul, together with all the Holy Apostles.

IKOS I

Blessed are you Simon, Son of Jonah, Christ, the son of the Living God, said to you, O Apostle Peter who are worthy of glory. How may we be worthy of blessedness, O Blessed One of God? Truly because of our loving duty we come to you in faith and now we sing to you:

• Rejoice first after Christ among the Apostles, foundation of the Holy Church.
• Rejoice powerful pillar of the Orthodox Faith and Its confirmation.
• Rejoice zealous lover of Christ’s teaching.
• Rejoice first seated of the Apostolic College.
• Rejoice good gatekeeper of the Kingdom of Heaven.
• Rejoice renown physician of those who repent of their sins.
• Rejoice rejecter of worldly vanity and lover of the spiritual life.
• Rejoice abandoner of material nets and fisher of the universe with imperishable nets.
• Rejoice enlighteners Peter and Paul who enlighten like two great luminaries.
• Rejoice twins yoked together by God, His chariots bearing the light of knowledge.
• Rejoice all you Holy Apostles, seers of God, for you are lights of the world.
• Rejoice for through you, through Christ, everywhere the Faith that saves us shines forth.
• Rejoice Saints Peter and Paul together with all the Holy Apostles.