AmericanPapist Comments
The fastest track to reunion with the Orthodox is a recognition of papal primacy. Rather than parse the multitude of smaller disagreements, theological or otherwise, let us all recognize and trust in the authority of the Petrine Office, and let that settle the rest of our differences.
WAC
Though I know better than to equate our Orthodox brethren with Protestants, the last binding proclamation in their church was back in the 700's.
Even if such a radical reunion were to be pronounced, I know there would be a great many Orthodox believers who would reject its validity.
It's too much change for a people who do not believe in change.
That's the sticking point, what does primacy mean? Is it first among equals? Is it a primacy of honor, or a judicial primacy? That's still to be determined. Cardinal Kaspar is quoted from a Vatican Radio interview that it will likely take another decade to get that all straightened out. As long as we can slip it in before the 1000 year anniversary of the schism though, we're probably in good shape.
From Russia and the Pope:
Those who follow Orthodox and Catholic relations are well aware of the recent meeting between the hierarchies of said Churches in Ravenna to discuss the “The Ecclesiological and Canonical consequences of the Sacramental nature of the Church.”
The meeting was really about the Pope.
In fact, most meetings between the Catholics and the Orthodox are really about the Pope. Or, anyway, he is the white-cassocked elephant in the room at such meetings. There is no more significant blockade to reunion between the Apostolic Churches than their differing opinions on the proper use of the Petrine office (if, indeed, they can even agree that the papal office is Petrine).
Those who follow Orthodox and Catholic relations are also well aware that, before the beginning of the Ravenna meeting, the Moscow delegation respectfully departed. The stated reason for their withdrawal was the presence of the Estonian Orthodox Church, which the Russians regard as under their jurisdiction, despite the fact that the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople granted them an independent status. The Ecumenical Patriarchate had no right to do so, according to the Moscow Patriarchate, because the Estonians fell under their territory. Yadda yadda yadda.
Maybe this was the Russians’ genuine, heartfelt reason for walking out of an ecumenical discussion. Maybe not....
The Patriarch of Moscow currently heads the largest body of Orthodox Christians in the world. When the representatives of Russian Orthodoxy leave an ecumenical discussion, that leaves a massive body of Orthodox Christians unrepresented. It's a big deal. In practical terms, the Patriarch of Moscow is the most powerful man in the Orthodox Church. Now, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople has more history and more honorifics, but not so much raw power. Turkey isn't exactly a hotbed of Christianity in any form.
There's that, and there's this whole idea of the "Third Rome." Quite a while ago - six hundred and fifty years or so - some Russian Orthodox Christians decided that Moscow was the true center of Christianity. Once, they acknowledged, this was Rome. Then, Constantine moved the capitol of his empire to Constantinople, thereby creating a "Second Rome." After the fall of this empire then, where were Orthodox Christians to look for their paragon of orthopraxis? These Russians looked around themselves and - lo and behold - found Moscow's domes the highest.
So, when the Russian Orthodox speak of independently formulating their position on universal primacy and uncompromisingly defending that position, I have to wonder whether they don't have something like the "Third Rome" in mind. Which is to say that the primacy belongs to them.
I'm certainly no expert on these goings-on. All I know is what I read in the news and a little bit of history, but - for whatever it's worth -
Commenting by HaloScan
