However, what does it mean for Christians of the West? (And for all our folk Catholicism, we are Christians of the West.)
It means the renewal of an ancient hope that has never been more of a whisper since the atrocities of 1204. Yes, we are talking about hurts almost a millennium old. But much progress has been made towards reconciliation. In 1975, the mutual anathemas of 1054 issued by an irate Patriarch of Constantinople and an irate papal legate were lifted. Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople have been constantly working towards unity, and for a while, it seemed like the dream could become a reality. Sure, obstacles remained, but none that could not be overcome with theological dialogue (filioqua, filioque, anyone?) and prudent political maneuvering. There was only one real, immovable obstacle.
That was Alexei II.
Here's to hoping that dialogue will move forward with a new man on the Russian Orthodox helm. Especially since the man touted as the next patriarch is more receptive to dialogue with Rome.
Maybe the dream can move beyond a whisper. Maybe we can utter it now...a unified ancient Christendom! What a weapon to bring to bear in an age filled with so many enemies. And, how wonderful a sign for the age, with a Church breathing with both lungs East and West.
Requiscat in Pace, Patriarch. Ora pro nobis.
The problem with the Eastern Churches (most particularly the Russian Church) is that throughout the centuries they have grown so insular to the point of according nationalism with almost the same footing as orthodoxy in faith (see the "canonization" of the last Tsar's family.) This would certainly be a point of difficulty with the truly universal Church that the Western Church has evolved into. It's not merely going to be a west-east dialogue but a long series of west-russian, west-greek, west-[insert name of eastern nationality here] etc. dialogues.
ReplyDeleteBut yes, I agree that continuous dialogue is the key. A true reunion might not happen in our generation, but it will happen by the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Minor good news: since the Eastern and Western Churches are big on tradition, we can be assured that other "Christian" sects will not interfere in (nor have the intellectual capacity to participate in) the dialogue.
I agree with everything you said. With regards to the fragmented nature of dialogue with the East, the Patriarch of Constantinople holds considerable sway, and Rome has been negotiating with all the Eastern European Orthodox Churches as a bloc. The biggest obstacle with this large bloc was Alexei II. I'm sure that once the entire Eastern European bloc united with Rome, the Chaldeans, Assyrians, Syrians, Armenians and other smaller Near-Eastern Churches will be more open to unification. (Although, unification with these churches is icing on the cake. Christendom of old did not exactly encompass them, as many of these churches are not even Nicene in creed.)
ReplyDeleteAs for non-interference, yeah, they've already tuned the Anglicans out, what with the female priests and gay bishops. Only Rome and the various eastern Orthodox churches maintained Apostolic Succession, which is the crux of unification dialogue.