Iconic Films

2 for 1 tickets to Singin' In The Rain, this coming Monday. Book now

Navigation - link to other main sections from here

From The Times

November 16, 2007

Vatican joins historic talks to end 950-year rift with Orthodox church

Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent and Paul Bompard in Rome

The Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches took tentative steps towards healing their 950-year rift yesterday by drafting a joint document that acknowledges the primacy of the Pope.

The 46-paragraph “Ravenna Document”, written by a special commission of Catholic and Orthodox officials, envisages a reunified church in which the Pope could be the most senior patriarch among the various Orthodox churches.

Just as Pope John Paul II was driven by the desire to bring down Communism, so Pope Benedict XVI hopes passionately to see the restoration of a unified Church. Although he is understood to favour closer relations with traditional Anglicans, the Anglican Communion is unlikely to be party to the discussions because of its ordination of women and other liberal practices.

Unification with the Orthodox churches could ultimately limit the authority of the Pope, lessening the absolute power that he currently enjoys within Catholicism. In contrast, a deal would greatly strengthen the Patriarch of Constantinople in his dealings with the Muslim world and the other Orthodox churches.

Pope Benedict has called a meeting of cardinals from all over the world in Rome on November 23, when the document will be the main topic of discussion. The Ravenna “road map” concedes that “elements of the true Church are present outside the Catholic communion”.

It suggests that means “be sought out” to set up a new ecumenical council, similar to those of the early Church which drew up the Nicene and other creeds, and to which Catholic and Orthodox bishops would be invited. Such a council would attempt formally to end the schism of 1054 between East and West.

If the proposals move forward, the Pope would be acknowledged as the universal Primate, as he was before the schism. Although it is not stated outright, he would be expected by the Orthodox churches to relinquish the doctrine of infallibility. The proposals could also allow married priests in the Catholic Church, as already happens in the Orthodox.

However, continuing disputes within the Orthodox Church between Constantinople and Moscow mean that there is unlikely to be agreement among the entire Orthodox community about reconciliation with Rome.

The document, The Ecclesiological and Canonical Consequences of the Sacramental Nature of the Church, has been produced by a commission of Orthodox and Catholic bishops and theologians that met in Ravenna in western Italy last month. The Russian delegate walked out of the meeting, an indication of the enduring disputes within the Orthodox Church.

Referring to the early councils of the Church, whose decisions are still central to doctrine throughout Christendom, the document adds: “In the course of history, when serious problems arose affecting the universal communion and concord between Churches – in regard either to the authentic interpretation of the faith, or to ministries and their relationship to the whole Church, or to the common discipline which fidelity to the Gospel requires – recourse was made to Ecumenical Councils.” These councils, which assembled bishops from Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, are still regarded as binding by Catholics and the Orthodox in particular. “The means which will allow the reestablishment of ecumenical consensus must be sought out,” the document states.

The Catholics at the Ravenna meeting were led by Cardinal Walter Kasper, of the Council for Promoting Christian Unity. The Orthodox were headed by Metropolitan Zizioulas, of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

A delegate from Moscow blamed Constantinople for upsetting the talks, and the final text published by the Vatican was agreed without the input of the Moscow Patriarchate. After Rome and Constantinople, Moscow is agreed to be third in the hierarchy of “equals”, but it is still at odds with Rome over the Uniate Catholics in Ukraine, whose loyalty is to the Pope.

If the Orthodox were able to move closer to Rome, the Constantinople Patriarchate would have much stronger influence in its dialogue with the Muslim world in Turkey and beyond. Healing the schism would in effect turn Patriarch Bartholomew into an Orthodox “Pope”.

The document suggests that the Pope, always referred to in the text as “Bishop of Rome”, could be the “first” among the regional patriarchs. But this would be only as a primus inter pares, with his authority resting firmly on the support and consensus of the other patriarchs. “Certainly Rome could not be the absolute centre of administration, with authority over all the others,” Greek Metropolitan Athanasios Chatzopoulos, one of the participants of the Ravenna conference, said. “The ‘primus’ would not be able to do anything without the consent of the other Patriarchs.”

The great divide

- On July 16, 1054, Pope Leo IX excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Patriarch, Cerularius, soon reciprocated, excommunicating the Pope

- Christianity has since been split in two, largely because of three words: The Nicene Creed of the Roman Church says that the Holy Ghost “proceeds from the Father and the Son”; the Orthodox Church claims the Holy Ghost originates with the Father alone.

- This “Filioque clause” was the official reason for the Great Schism, but other disputes would now need to be clarified before the churches could unite

Sources: Catholic Encyclopedia, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, Britannica, Orthodox Research Institute

Read Ruth Gledhill’s blog

I'm surprised to see the amount of confusion over the doctrine of papal infallibility. Someone questioned whether the Pope was infallible when he called for the 4th crusade (BTW, the sacking of Constantinople was not ordered by the pope, and many of those responsible were later excommunicated for behavior that was clearly against the will of God).

In fact, papal infallibility refers only to when the Pope speaks as leader of the Church ON MATTERS OF FAITH OR MORALS and declares that subject to be true. So, a Pope declared as the universal leader of the Church that the Immaculate Conception (of the Mother of God) was true. Later, a Pope declared as a matter of faith that the Mother of God was assumed into Heaven. These are the only two times so far that a pope has spoken with the intent of making an infallible declaration of faith.

Peter Fata, Houston, TX,

To finish, the doctrine of Papal Infallibility cannot be given up without comprimising the councils of the past 1000 years. To do so would still compromise the authority of the Pope to call general councils. If we can negate the past several general councils (whether or not the orthodox currently accept them - which they would have to do for true unification), then whats to stop the Church from negating the first seven? In essence, the Church would be left saying the teachings of the Church are infallible, but any truth is subject to not having been a teaching of the Church in the first place!

Unification involves the Orthodox more or less accepting the past councils, and the supreme primacy of the Pope. In turn, the only thing Catholicism can do for the orthodox is respect their traditions and worship (the different lents and other things that people have alluded to). Eastern Catholics churchs already provide a template for respect of Eastern autonmy and their unique practices

Peter Fata, Houston, TX,

Jesus prayed that we may be one as He and the Father are one. Any conversations that lead us closed to what he wanted for us is a blessing. How can be be one as Catholics, Orthodox and 30,00 denominations? We must return to the Church He handed on to his apostles.

C. Molina, Longview, Tx., USA

I am an Orthodox and it seems to me that it's rather difficult to unite our Russisn Orthodox Church and Rome. We have different lents, different tradidtions. We celebrate religious holidays a bit later than in Europe. Historically, Russian people dislike Catholics due to Polish invasion in seventeenth century A.D. We have different cultures and the only way to overcome this situation is to respect each other. For majority of Russians religious compromise is impossible.
Anna, Russia.

Anna, samara, Russia

How sad that the wide gult between the East and West could be reduced to what is perceived to be a few differences. Orthodoxy does not benefit from union with the Roman Catholic hierarchy. It is tragic that the Roman Catholic laity remain in ignorance of the teachings of Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy should remain the narrow way.

deb, Indy, US

Nothing like having an increasingly populous common "adversary" to make people see their own differences and points of divergence as less important...................

bill, towoomba,

Reading all these comments it is obvious that the baggage of the last 1000 years is still travelling. And it all goes back to the baggage of the trinitarian muddle. Wouldnt it be better in the 21st century to realize that doctrine will always be divisive and relegate it to history. Why not try what the so called 'Gnostics' sought , no, not their myths but the coviction that we all possess a portion of the divine 'ousia' and humbly praise God and serve man as Jesus taught.

Robert Lloyd, Wirral, England

How refreshing to see that someone knows some history. (Rob Roberson).

But Moscow is the third Rome. I wish I could remember the source and entire quote. Rome fell. Constantinople was the second. Moscow was the third and a fourth there shall not be.

Actually this looks like a remake of the false Council of Florence. You don't know what I'm talking about? I suggest a couple of books that will inform you: "A Short History of Byzantium" by John J. Norwich and "The Lives of the Pillars of Orthodoxy" published by Holy Apostles Convent and Dormition Skete. There is hardly room for a history course in this comment form. Suffice to say that the Patriarch of Contaninople and the Emperor forgot the words of the psalmist, "Put not your trust in princes in sons of men, in whom there is no salvation." Constaniople fell, in spite of (or, perhaps, because of) the false union with Rome.

What further misfortune will Patriarch Bartholmew bring upon us by repeating history?

Mary, House Springs, USA

It's intriguing that you say "On July 16, 1054, Pope Leo IX excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople" when in fact Leo IX had died on April 19, 1054. It is a well known historical fact that it was the papal representative, Cardinal Humbert, who excommunicated the patriarch, and that his authority to do so had expired with the Pope. So the "excommunication" of 1054 does not carry nearly the weight that some may think.

Ron Roberson, Washington, DC, USA

Observations:

- There is no way Moscow can be third. The Ecumenical Councils dictate the order of the first five as Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. Russia is not in the first five. It certainly is not third.

- The Orthodox Church does not formally claim "infallibility". We claim to be the only Church. We also claim that the Holy Spirit speaks infallibly through Ecumenical Councils. We do not recognize the infallibility of any office or individual, only the entire Church in coucil can be infallible.

- I thought Ravena wa an interesting place to have the meeting. It is the site of some of the most theologically significant Icons in (formerly-) Byzantine Italy. Especially the Icon of the Transfiguration.

- THere are many Orthodox Churches (listed here: http://oca.org/OCworldindex.asp?SID=2 ) not just Moscow and Constantinople. THey would all (and not just their primates, but their clergy and faithful) hae to agree to any union with Rome.

Matt, Palo Alto, California, America

It is heartening that the Pope is considering relinquishing his infallibility. But I wonder if this is retroactive - was Innocent III infallible when he raised the Fourth Crusade that led to the Sack of Constantinople? If he was, perhaps a slight apology would be in order. In the interests of comity, of course.

Nick, Singapore, Singapore

Position of both churches regarding the filioque was to agree to disagree. Eastern Catholic churches, with Rome's permission and approval, now recite the creed without the filioque, so this need not prove a barrier to closer relations.

Bob Shaffern, Scranton/PA, USA

The statement that "The Nicene Creed of the Roman Church says that the Holy Ghost 'proceeds from the Father and the Son'" MISLEADING and is FALSE.

Misleading because there is no such thing as the 'Nicene Creed of the Roman Church' - as at that time (IV century A.D.) the Roman-Catolic church did not exist, i.e. the Roman bishopric was part of the one Church. You are actually referring to what is known as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381 A.D.).

And false, as the Creed citation is wrong: the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed states: "And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the Prophets" - exactly as the Orthodox still believe.

Irineos , Skopje,

Only last july Ratzinger revealed to the world that Christ "establised here on earth only one church", meaning the Church of Rome, and that other forms of Christianity "cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense."

Mariella , Juinen, Holland

Again we have MOSCOW having a problem with everything. why is this so typical??? When did Moscow have anything good to say anyway. All Moscow wants is UKRAINE and her churches back. As much as moscow is opposed to the catholic church, it has just as much oppositoin to the UKR Orthadox church as well. Moscow want unity as well. HER UNITY. 1 church. the RUSSIAN orthadox church. no more, no less...

Taras, Edmonton,

This is extraordinary news. I am a bit disappointed in the article's inability to get facts straight about both the Orthodox and Catholic churches, which brings all of the speculation into serious doubt.

I'm a bit disappointed also by the rather uncharitable words by those non-Catholic and non-Orthodox Christians posting here. I suggest you do some research to determine by what authority we know what the Bible is (especially the New Testament).

Peter, I suggest you re-read your history a little closer. Most of modern science came through the Catholic church - including heliocentrism - an idea the Capernicus came up with. He was a Catholic churchman and probably a priest. Another priest, LeMaitre first proposed the Big Bang theory.
Also, the contents of the bible was meticulously transcribed for 1.5 millenia - largely by monks. So you might first thank them for providing something that could be translated and printed.

Gary, Texas, USA

One Christian Church - Delighted. No more Catholics, no more Protesters, no more Greek Orthodox, no more dissension.

Mike Ryan, Christchurch, U.K.

This seems to be a ridiculous move on the part of the Catholics. The Orthodox church is an instrument of the state to help the rulers to subjugate the believers, it provide no moral or spiritual guidance. To " come to an understanding" with the Orthodox church is similar to democrats coming to an understanding with the Nazis or Communists.

Paul, London, UK

You do not say what is to happen about the Filioque clause, so presumably this is yet to be decided.
It must be remembered that it was the introduction of this clause by the western (Roman Catholic) church which brought about the schism, so the western church in effect broke away and it is that church which would effectively be coming home rather than the other way round.

John Claxton, Portishead, Somerset

ï¼·ï½ˆï½…ï½”ï½ˆï½…ï½’ã€€ï½ï½’ã€€ï½Žï½ï½”ã€€ï¼¡ï½Žï½‡ï½Œï½‰ï½ƒï½ï½Žã€€ï¼£ï½ˆï½•ï½’ï½ƒï½ˆï½…ï½“ã€€ï½ï½’ï½…ã€€ï½‰ï½Žï½–ï½ï½Œï½–ï½…ï½„ã€€ï½‰ï½Ž
this unification exercise, apparently this is a great step forward in the history of Christianity.
I trust that this attempt willã€€pave the way to the bright future of
the religion supported by the overall Christians across the
world.

M. Murakami, Tokyo, Japan

Ravenna Document here
http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/14/130.aspx#2

BBrown, Pittsburgh, USA

As an Eastern Catholic who worships according to the rites and rituals of the Eastern Orthodox Church but who recognizes the papacy, I pray for an end to this destructive schism.

John R., Glenmoore, PA

As reported in the Religious Press,the wife of a Protestant Bishop in Eire has converted to the Catholic Church,in the past month. Their 4 children attend R.C. schools.
Several Anglican Parishes have contacted the Vatican to be brought as a whole, into Communion with the Catholic Church as they want to have a leader to follow,and not have a self appointed leader who can change all the rules as he goes along.
The Catholic Church is recognised by her 4 signs --
She is 1
She is holy
She is catholic
She is Apostolic
is Holy

t.mccormack, manchester, uk

I'm not sure where to start regarding the abysmal understanding of the Orthodox Church shown by this article. But I will start with the easiest: healing the schism has nothing to do with Bartholomew becoming the Orthodox "pope". He already is if by this one means the first among equals. If the pope of Rome joins with the Orthodox church according to Orthodox ecclesiology, Bartholomew simply becomes the second among equals.

The Orthodox, however, do not have one leader. Bartholomew is one of 15: Alexei of Moscow is another and Herman of the United States is yet another. All of these are autonomous and all would have to come on board as well and, even if they do, they will not relinquish authority, they will simply assign to Rome the first position in the lists currently occupied by Bartholomew. Thus the pope of Rome's pronouncements on, say, divorce and contraception would have no force among any of the other flocks, just as Bartholomew's pronouncements have little effect in Moscow.

Nickolas, London,

I am so glad to read carmine's comments, which I thoroughly
agree with. The Bible is so very plain, we have a very clear teaching on matters concerning Jesus being our high priest and only Mediator. Saints too we are told are Christians, who are born again of the spriit of God, thank goodness we have no need of an self made infallible pope, or any other priests, we have complete access to the one and only Holy Father God, through his son Jesus Christ. How the Roman Catholic Church, and other High Churches complicate and distort the truth. The blind leading the blind.

M Elward, Bridgend, Glam

We can't let this happen! Why, we -- we'll have to change all of our stationery! But seriously,

I look forward to the return to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Stephen B, Los Angeles, United States

Yes, those good Lutherans Copernicus and Galileo really got us off that geocentric non-sense, right?

Not to mention the Calvinist Gregor Mendel in biology, and the Unitarian LeMaitre's Big Bang theory.

Someday the meme that the Catholic church is opposed to science will die out, although I fear that I will first.

Ed, Ft Walton Beach, FL, US

I do wish writers would be more careful with their facts. The statement "could also allow married clergy in the Catholic Church" in inaccurate in that the Catholic Church has always had married clergy. Search "Eastern Rite Catholic" for more. Maronites have remained faithful to Rome, though most Eastern Rite Catholic Churches are so-called uniate churches. Even the Latin (aka Roman) Rite of the Catholic Church now has a few, generally former Anglican priests who, having converted to Roman Catholicism, are allowed to continue performing their priestly duties. They usually minister to former Anglican parishes which converted en masse to Roman Catholicism in response to the Anglican Church's ordaination of women and/or actively gay men. Though these converts are currently considered to be part of the Roman Rite, there is some who believe they may eventually be allowed to form a new separate (Anglican?) rite within the larger Catholic Chuch.

Tim Karigan, Huntsville, Alabama

This is WONDEREFUL news and a giant leap forward.
On bended knees I thank God for this moment and to see an end to this 950 yr division.
As an Anglican I am sick of the wishy washy "supermarket" pick &choose of beliefs and the self interest of minority groups like women clergy and the self imploding course it's chosen with homosexuality.
Rowan Williams could learn a lot from the Holy Father and the Orthodox Churches..though he heads a Church that is irrelevent and seeing it's congregations vote with their feet.
That said he will just be a spectator and it's likely that those of the Conservative wing and Forward in Faith will follow suit ,whilst the liberal and middle of the road CoE will just watch and continue the march to irrelevence and self destruction.
God Bless the Holy Father and Orthodox Churches

john, durham,

The long dissolution of Christianity stops...and slowly begins to reverse.

Mary Cunningham, London, Great Britain

The Pope is not infallible - he's irrelevant

Scott, London,

Catholic does indeed mean universal and people should be careful to speak of roman catholic if they mean Christians who acknowledge the pope as the head of their church. It was the schism between these 2 churches which greatly assisted the march os islam accross what was then the Cristian wolrd in the middle east. egypt and north africa into spain and much of eastern europe.

The proposal also ignores the "protestant' churches. It was these churches which, with the assistance of the printing press and translations of once lost "original" texts allowed intelligent thinkers to question the then current RC dogma

Thanks to them we were able to see that the earth revolves round the sun and create our science based modern way of living

peter, singapore, singapore

The trouble with people like Carmine is that they believe that they and only they understand the words of Jesus Christ and everyone else is a heretic. I suppose I should be happy that, as Hector Berlioz said, they don't burn people anymore.

As far as Benedict is concerned, his efforts are simply aimed at preserving his moral authority over everyone else.

So which is worse?

Christopher Hobe Morrison, Pine Bush, Ulster County, NY, USA

Being a baptized and practicing member of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and having in my possession a book entitled "We The Black Jews" by Yosef A.S ben-Jochannan, found and read on page 233 " Obviously, he did not remember that his own brand of "Christianity" a-al European style, was basically designed from its earliest days - [from its inception in Egypt] by threee "African fathers of the Church [Catholic' meaning "universal" back then], namely "TERTULIAN" [from Carthage], St. Cyprian [from Carthage], and St. Augustine [from Numidia]; all three of whom lived during the 2nd and 3rd century C.C or A.F.; and all three were no different than their fellow "native [African] pagans" that became Pope{s} of the Ronman Catholic Christian Church, "namely Mechiades, Leo and Vicgtor.. Lastly, he forgot that Ethiopia became officially "A Christian nation ca 188 C.E, before Rome; in ca. 312 C.E./A.D ect." I have serious doubts about the Pope's primacy over any Ethiopian Bishop etc. RFF

R. Ford, NYC NY, USA

Er ... Ravenna isn't in "western" Italy.

Jennifer S, Walnut Creek, California, USA

As an Eritrean Coptic Orthodox faithful the reported "intent" is a lovely no-love-lost Romanesque story indeed. Nine-hundred + years did not pass for nough. The Catholic Church (read Vatican) is exquisitely a western multinational business /state entity run by sophisticated togas. Mutatis mutandis, as a Coptic Orthodox, hic maneo optime.

Regards!
Amanuel

Amanuel, Durham, NC

None of them represent the church of Jesus because they are not christians... they are pseudo-christians and anti-christian, giving a bad name to Christianity.
The church of Jesus is not an organization, but the sum of all believers with Jesus at its head as stated in 1st Corinthians 12-31.
The church of Jesus Christ has no need of priests or popes or patriarchs because Christians live under a new covenant in which, as plainly stated in Hebrews 7:22 - 8:13: "... Jesus lives on forever, and his work as priest does not pass on to someone else ... Jesus, then, is the High Priest that meets our needs...".
The words of Jesus uttered against the Pharisees are just as appropriate today for the Roman, Othodox, Anglican (for which its head is the Queen) and other unique church organizations: "... why do you disobey God's commands, in order to follow your own teaching?... it is no use for them to worship me, because they teach man made rules as though they were my laws!" Matthew 15:3-9

carmine cicchiello, adelaide, australia