Continues a Tradition From the Window of Papal Apartment
VATICAN CITY, MAY 1, 2005 (ZENIT.org).- Benedict XVI extended Easter greetings to Orthodox Christians, who were celebrating the day, and indicated again he will pursue the goal of Catholic-Orthodox unity.
In his first Regina Caeli address from the window of his papal apartment, the Holy Father today said God is “asking us to travel decisively down the path toward full unity.”
Tens of thousands of people were gathered below in St. Peter’s Square to hear the Pontiff’s address, which continued a Sunday tradition of Pope John Paul II’s.
“I address you, my very dear brothers and sisters, for the first time from this window that the beloved figure of my predecessor made familiar to countless people in the entire world,” Benedict XVI said.
“From Sunday to Sunday, John Paul II, faithful to an appointment which became a cherished habit, accompanied for more than a quarter-century the history of the Church and of the world, and we continue to feel him closer to us than ever,” he said.
The Holy Father, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, thanked “all those who supported me in these days with prayer.”
Benedict XVI moved into the third-floor papal apartment on Saturday. He had been living in the Vatican guesthouse Domus Sanctae Marthae since his election on April 19 while the apartment was readied for the new Pope.
May 1 is the Labor Day holiday in Europe; liturgically it is usually the feast of St. Joseph the Worker. Benedict XVI mentioned that his baptismal name was Joseph.
He said he hoped that people, especially the young, would always be able to find work and that “working conditions are ever more respectful” of human dignity.
The Holy Father also referred to problems on the international scene, including “wars, poverty and diseases.”
He mentioned the African nation of Togo, torn by strife after disputed elections. He said he was praying for harmony and peace for Togo’s people.
What kind of unity? Since ultimately it is the office of the Papacy as conceived of in the West that divides us. Is he willing and able to infallably renouce his infallability and drop the claims to supremacy? If not there will be no unity.
What’s the difference between infallibility of one and infallibility of many? I assume that the belief is that the Orthodox Church as a whole cannot error in matters of faith and morals, correct?
There must be some select group of Orthodox clergy that gathers and makes pronouncements about what the “official” doctrine of the Church is, yes? I gather from statements made here that such pronouncements cannot contain error? Or am I incorrect?
It seems to me that the doctrines that the Orthodox Church hold as absolute, non-negotiable and “infallible” go back centuries, pre-dating the schism of the Eastern and Western churches. Most Orthodox doctrine was fully developed by the time of Saint John Crysostom and since then there have been very few new theological concepts to protect with claims of infallalibity.
Orthodox theology never tried to determine how many angels could dance on the head of pin, or debated whether the sun revolved around the earth or visa-versa, or agonized over many other such matters that enthralled Roman Popes and western European theologeans. Orthodox Christianity never attempted to define God and the afterlife in as detailed a manner as the Roman Catholic church, which is why there is no Orthodox doctrine of purgatory, for example. Orthodoxy simply accepted that some matters are part of the mystery of God and beyond the capabilities of human understanding and left it at that.
Far removed in Russia, or simply struggling to survive under Ottoman Turkish oppression, Eastern Orthodoxy was never challenged by the rationalism, deiesm and atheism that appeared in Europe during of the Enlightenment period and afterward. Orthodoxy did not need the concept of infallibility to bolster it’s authority in the face of a secular challenge because it was not confronted by one as in the West.
The infallability for we Orthodox resides in the Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit who makes the Will of God known through His action throughout and within the entire Church. Unlike Roman Catholocism which is largely a clerical religion, the Orthodox Church is clerical, monastic, and lay. Historically and practically each have been and still is essential to the function and witness of the Chruch.
The ultimate doctrinal authority for we Orthodox has always been the seven Ecumnenical Councils held from the fourth through the eighth centuries (most long after St. John Chrysostom reposed Dean). For a council to be authentic requires the collective assent of the clergy, monastics and lay people not in attendance at the council. Just as we proclaim the candidate for ordination as worthy in order for him to be ordained, so we must also accept the decrees of any council. If the councial is accepted, then its decrees can then be regarded as the wisdom of the Holy Spirt and therefore binding on the Church as a whole. No one man or group of men is ever considered infallible, least of all the bishops. Only the God-Man, Jesus Christ is infallible.
We also have realtively few doctrines compared to the West. Most of our doctrine is focused on the nature of Christ. One’s definition of the Church is reflective of one’s understanding of the nature of Christ Himself. To accept the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and supreme Pontiff is to change the understanding of the nature of the Church–radically–thus impinging on the understanding of Christ and the very process of salvation.
The issues are not small, they are not just a matter of worldly politics or language. We cannot both be correct. We can both be incorrect and to a certain extent we are even at our best. In any case, one can not just have a feel good, Barney type of unity. We have to come to terms with the real issues that divide us. Like it or not what divides us completely and effectively is the exisitance of a Bishop of Rome who proclaims himself to be ruler of the Church on earth. If he is correct, then we Orthodox are indeed unrighteous schismatics who need to repent and accept the true authority of Rome. If he is wrong, the Roman Catholics are the schismatics but with a doctrinal history since the schism that can be recognized as nothing but heretical.
I am sorry if anyone considers my statements offensive, but they are mild compared to the awful nature of the separation. If we are not willing to honestly face the essential questions, nothing will change. We need to pray for each other with open and loving hearts, but refuse to accept conterfeit unity based solely on natural human desire.
I just want to say that I am a catholic and the issues that divides our two Churches is very real. I do agree that we need to address the concerns that separates our two churches. I also believe that more than ever, there is a tremendous possibility and opportunity to be reunited once again. I think that once we achieve this full communion, our mutual arguments with each other over proselytism and other things will stop because we will belong to the same church body. I am very optimistic about this. There are so many challenges in the World at the moment and many people are becoming more and more alienated from their own faith. I know the benefits that the technological modern age brings, but we cannot afford to lose the spiritual ground as well that makes us even better human beings by realizing our potentials in this World. I sincerely believe the good that our faith can bring. I think that we can be secular, modern, open-minded thinkers and at the same time still retain our deep faith and devotion to our Church. I do not see why we have to sacrifice either. I think that if we are really faithful and practical, we will realize that we can make it work.
Ronald and all,
I’d like to interject a bit of practicality in this discussion as well. My wife is Polish. We met in Poland and married there while I was an assistant professor at the University in Poznan. She was raised as a devout Roman Catholic. I had been raised as a Protestant fundamentalist. We didn’t discuss religion much while dating (I know, bad mistake.)
After marriage, we moved to the U.S. and started attending church with my family at a Pentecostal church. A short while later, we moved away from my hometown for me to pursue a career, and we stopped going to church at all. A few years back, we started planning a baby, and my wife said that she would not even consider a child until we rejoined a church.
I said, okay, and started shopping for a protestant church. My wife went into full-scale rebellion. She absolutely refused to join a protestant church again. She had been miserable the first time, and saw no reason to revisit the experience.
To make her happy, I agreed to visit a Roman Catholic Church. I had attended mass frequently in Poland, and figured I knew what to expect. We attended a local Roman Catholic Church in Orlando, Florida for the mid-afternoon mass on Sunday.
The church was extremely modern, and looked more like a protestant church than the churches in Europe. The mass started with the priest, barely vested, walking around and talking to the vistors with a microphone. The mass proceeded with a few rock-n-roll songs and then the Host was distributed – by female Eucharistic ministers. My wife came UNGLUED. She started yelling at me in Polish that this couldn’t be a Roman Catholic Church. I told her to calm down. After the mass, we left and my wife kept asking, “Does the Pope know about this? Does the Pope know about this?”
Eventually we found our way into Orthodoxy. I’d like to say that it was for some kind of grand attachment to Orthodox Theology, but I can’t really. While I do think that Orthodoxy has superior merits in many regards to Roman Catholicism, I wouldn’t have stood on such principles had my wife been happy to be Catholic in the United States. Really, it came down to the fact that my wife was disgusted by the liberal church practices in the U.S., and didn’t want to be part of it. At the same time, I saw no real reason to join a Roman Church whose mass was little different from the rock-n-roll revivals I had grown up with. I figured that I might as well stay protestant if the Romans were going to offer me the same thing.
In Orthodoxy, my wife believes that she has found the church in which she was raised. If we lived in Poland, we would most likely simply be Catholic. As we are in the United States, we have to either be Greek Catholic or Orthodox to find the mystery and the majesty of the Divine Liturgy. We have no interest in being Greek Catholic, because we know many of them (including not a few priests), and they are among the most miserable people I know. The Roman bishops do not value their uniqueness or the traditions, and they spend almost all their time complaining about their treatment by the Roman Catholic hierarchy.
In short, I know that there are real Theological differences between the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church. These are important, but for a lay person like myself, they are not the primary problem. The primary problem at this time for us in the pews, is that the current debased liturgical practices of the Roman Church are an embarrassment. They are, in fact, a scandal. The Roman Church must repair these serious deficiencies before I could ever partake of a chalice offered by a priest of the Roman Rite.
As a lay man, I don’t have the background to discuss ecclesiology, or purgatory, or the Immaculate Conception. Not really. But I do know if the liturgy inspires me and facilitates an encounter with God, or if the blaring of electric guitars is a distraction followed by being offered the Holy Host by a female lay woman.
Glen, I am constantly amazed by the comments from obviously intelligent, involved lay Orthodox like you and Missourian to the effect that you are not competent to address theological topics. Nonsense. One of the great traditions and strengths of the Orthodox Church is that lay people do understand the theology of the Church so that when our dear Bishops go off on a tangent somewhere, we can pull them back to the truth. If lay people do not study and become conversant with theology, we are not really fulfilling our responsibilities as a member of the Church.
Theology is too important to leave to the professionals, especially the academic professionals. In fact, your entire post is theological and ecclesiological in content. We, of course, must avoid arrogance and submit our opinions to our priests and bishops in most cases, but when they are wrong, we must be prepared to speak. The experiential theology of lay members of the Church has always been the validating agent in confirming the truth of our formal theology and praxis.
If there had been more U.S. Catholics like your wife when the liturgical devastation was occurring after Vatican II, the Roman Church would be much better off. However, even she cried out for the Pope to order his Church instead of taking on her God given office. If we Orthodox are to avoid the same fate in the U.S. we cannot let the bishops and academicians rule without our informed input.
There are too many people like myself who have escaped from the corrosive effects of heresy in other traditions that call themselves Christian to allow those same heresies to infiltrate the One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church.
I am the first to acknowledge that we are all heretics at some level because we all refuse to submit our untrue ideas of God, Man, and the Church to the teachings of the Church and allow the Holy Spirit to transform our mind and heart. We must shy away from labeling any individual a heretic–that is a job exclusively for the bishops in council or synod. However, we can identify and point out untrue and heretical ideas and be knowledgeable enough to back up our assertion with the official teaching of the Church.
Christ is Risen!!!
Fr. Jacobse’s Church
The pictures in the Naples newspapers were so beautiful! Respectful “wow!” What glorious artwork!!!
You mean that there is religious art? …..sacred art? Art that inspires the worshipper?
Can you tell I was raised Protestant?
Michael, Note 7
You are right.
Michael, Note 7
Michael, I am not a member of an orthodox church, so it really isn’t correct to call me an Orthodox laywoman. But, still your note 7 was on point.
My reading and study is sketchy and I am trying to remedy that but right now I am studying to pass the Patent Bar. I should be studying 10 hours a day. It is akin to setting out to memorize the New York City phone book. Using that analogy I am about at the letter F.(Enough self-pity…) Anyway the Hubster sure would like me to take the test and pass so that I am rejoin the work force. Given those study demands, I have maybe 60 minutes a day for serious reading.
Would you like to know some of the fine points of 37 C.F.R. 1.56 information disclosure statements?
I didn’t think so. It is as boring as it sounds.
Safeguarding the original deposit of faith. I believe the case can be made that both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches have done just that. But to believe that somehow the Orthodox Church has escaped some of the same problems that plague the Catholic Church is ignoring reality. ALL of Europe is facing the full onslaught of secularism and the Orthodox Church can’t simply ignore that Christianity is in danger within Europe. The thing that I find I have difficulty with Greek Orthodoxy is the attitude that the Greeks are the new Jews, God’s new chosen people. How can I say such a thing? Because I am Greek and what I see in many Orthodox Churches in the U.S. is an ethnic snobbery of sorts. I even see it directed at the non-Greek priest at the Greek Orthodox Church I attend. I truly believe in the vision of Pope John Paul II of the Church breathing with both lungs. I love the rich liturgical life of the East but I came to love and understand Orthodoxy more by the rich theological tradition of the West. A time of deep reflection came for me when I saw how the Greeks welcomed Pope John Paul II when he came to visit Greece. It was an embarrassment. The outright hate of some of the people was as far removed from Christ-like behavior as the world could witness. What threatening thing did John Paul II do? He apologized for any past offenses caused by the Catholic Church to the Orthodox Church. The scandal!
The two sister churched are the only ones that hold to the truth of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the bread and wine. We both hold to living sacramental lives.
To look for what divides instead of what unites is going against Christ’s wish that we may be one. The bottom-line for me…who was more Christ-like? The humble Bishop of Rome (who the Orthodox acknowledge is the first among equals) or the venom spewing Greek Orthodox greeting him upon his arrival?
The irony in all this for me is that it took my Catholic fiancée’s love of living a sacramental life that led me to do the same for the first time in my life through the beauty of this most wonderful Pascha season. I can thank her for helping lead me to understanding the richness of Orthodoxy; unfortunately I may have to experience that as a Byzantine Catholic so that I and my future bride may drink from the same cup. In the end that is what we should all be praying for…a church breathing with two lungs and drinking from the same cup. I don’t deny we have allot to overcome, but we can all do it is a way that bares a good witness to the rest of the world. Anger at a humble servant of God isn’t the answer.
Nothing gets Eastern Orthodox and Catholic juices flowing like talk about possible unity. Allow me one a categorical statement on this matter: It will never happen in our lifetime. In fact, I don’t think it will happen until until we all stand before the dread judgement seat of Christ.
On some points made above:
Dean writes, “Orthodox theology never tried to determine how many angels could dance on the head of pin, or debated whether the sun revolved around the earth or visa-versa, or agonized over many other such matters…”
Me: This is a cheap shot at Catholic thinking and philosophy that is completely unwarranted. It is sheer nonsense to say that the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas is nothing more than an effort “to determine how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.” I suggest tackling, at the very least, the work of Aquinas before you dismiss, out of hand, all Catholic thinking. BTW, volumes and volumes of work exist on Orthodox theology and spirituality. Is that nothing more than an effort to see how many monastics can dance on the head of pin?
Anonymous writes, “what divides us completely and effectively is the exisitance of a Bishop of Rome who proclaims himself to be ruler of the Church on earth…”
Me: Before the the 11th Century, Bishops in Eastern Christendom recognized the Bishop of Rome as “First among Equals.” A fair point to argue is how this particular phrase was interpreted with regards to worldly authority. Some argue that the Bishop of Rome had no more authority than any other Bishop. Others argue the Bishop of Rome has authority through his apostilic successsion from St. Peter. That has been an issue of debate since the early days of Christianity, and will likely continue until the end of time. I just don’t think it is a fair position to dismiss the Pope because he claims “to be the ruler of the Church on earth.” To the best of my knowledge, no Pope in recent history has ever made that claim.
Glen writes, “I saw no real reason to join a Roman Church whose mass was little different from the rock-n-roll revivals…”
Me: I’m sorry that you had such a horrible experience in the one Catholic Mass you attended. Your wife was correct to wonder what the Pope was doing to rattle the cage of the Bishop who was responsible for that particular church in his diocese, where people were experiencing a Mass as a “rock & roll revival.” But I wonder, did you go to any other Mass at a different church? Or did you just write them all off based on this one experience. I’m not arguing here, for you to try to the Catholic Church again. I’m glad that you and your wife found your way home in the OCA. I’m just trying to point out that you are condemning the entire Catholic Church based on what happened in one Mass. I just think that is a bit unfair. Should we condemn all of the Eastern Orthodox churches because of the wretched experiences and looks of disdain some receive (myself included) when they visit an Orthodox Church?
I think that is enough for the moment. If all this makes me out to be some kind of Catholic apologist, then so be it. Let the slings and arrows fly.
God Bless,
Daniel
George, great comments. I would only like others to prayerfully consider the words of Benedict XVI in his Homily at the Mass for the inauguration of the Pontificate:
“Here I want to add something: both the image of the shepherd and that of the fisherman issue an explicit call to unity. “I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must lead them too, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd” (Jn 10:16); these are the words of Jesus at the end of his discourse on the Good Shepherd. And the account of the 153 large fish ends with the joyful statement: “although there were so many, the net was not torn” (Jn 21:11). Alas, beloved Lord, with sorrow we must now acknowledge that it has been torn! But no – we must not be sad! Let us rejoice because of your promise, which does not disappoint, and let us do all we can to pursue the path towards the unity you have promised. Let us remember it in our prayer to the Lord, as we plead with him: yes, Lord, remember your promise. Grant that we may be one flock and one shepherd! Do not allow your net to be torn, help us to be servants of unity!”
God Bless,
Daniel
Daniel,
I don’t have anything against the Roman Catholic Church. I have immense respect for Pope Benedict, as I had for his predecessor. Not being ‘ethnically’ Orthodox, I don’t have a dog in these Orthodox/Catholic struggles which are historically rooted. I understand the bitterness, as a historian, of the Catholic Poles versus the Orthodox Russians or the Catholic Italians versus the Orthodox Greeks. Understanding, however, is a long ways from condoning the ongoing bitterness on both sides. Eventually, you have to forgive and forget, which I think was Pope John Paul II’s message when visiting Greece.
I don’t consider your comments to be Catholic apologetics in any fashion. The Roman Church is important, and has contributed a great many things to the world that are positive. It is a bedrock of resistance, at least as far the Vatican is concerned, to the relativism that Pope Benedict XVI has decried.
Yes, my wife and I did try some other masses at other churches. The fact was, however, that every parish in our area sponsors ‘charismatic’ masses or ‘polka’ masses, or ‘Latin’ music masses. Every parish we looked at had women Eucharistic ministers. We even attended some baptisms of family friends, and were immensely turned off by the casual, non-sacramental way in which they were conducted.
Dan – converting to Orthodoxy was the hardest thing my wife has ever done. Her family was upset and angry for months. They accused her of turning her back on her nation and her heritage. For a Pole to become Orthodox was tatamount to renouncing her Polish citizenship and seeking to become Russian, in the minds of her family anyway. This was not done lightly, I assure you. Even today, in the OCA, my wife finds herself feeling uncomfortable with the Russian-feel of so many small ‘t’ traditions.
If we could have spared her this by joining the Roman Church, then we would have. Believe me.
The problem, as I said, was the degradation of the Roman Catholic worship. We couldn’t get past it. We looked at various ‘resistance’ Roman Catholic Churches that still practice the Tridentine Mass, but what was the point of that? We also considered Byzantine Rite Catholic, but that seemed to be a blind alley. As I said, we have numerous friends (many clergy) who are Uniates, and they were all miserable.
We originally came into a Greek parish. We stayed there for about four years, but eventually got tired of the Greek language and the Greek ethnic superiority. We are happy with the OCA, having been there now for almost a year and one Pascha. I love the Orthodox Church, its liturgy and its beauty. My wife is happy also. We worship liturgically, respectfully, reverentially, and in English. We have all that we need.
Could things be better? I believe that the Roman Church as shown in the funeral of Pope John Paul II is a place I could be at rest. It is the church whose masses I attended in small villages in Poland and elsewhere in Eastern Europe. If that Church comes back to American shores, then we will have something real to talk about. As long as the Roman Church is riddled with liberal bishops and clergy who are trying to protestantize the faith, unity will be an impossiblity.
Yes, I know that political liberals abound in Orthodoxy, and they bother the stew out of me. But they have had precious little impact on the worship of the church. We have no electrice guitars, we still fast, we still practice ascetic discipline, we still take up our cross. The Romans need to re-learn these things in the U.S., and the Orthodox can teach them.
On the other hand, the Romans can teach the Orthodox many things as well. As I said, I don’t have a dog in the Roman-Orthodox fight, I’m just a lay schmuck trying to raise a family and prepare for eternal life. As far as I’m concerned, I’d like to see these problems behind us and all of us on one team, just not at the expense of the things that really, really matter.