Cardinal Kasper On the Assyrian Church

Zenit ^ | 6/22/2007

[markomalley]

Cardinal Kasper On the Assyrian Church

Interview With President of Council for Christian Unity

VATICAN CITY, JUNE 22, 2007 (Zenit.org).- There are signs of new hope that relations with the Assyrian Church of the East are advancing, says Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

Cardinal Kasper met Thursday with Catholicos Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV, head of the Assyrian Church of the East. The patriarch had met earlier with Benedict XVI.

On that occasion, the cardinal granted this interview with ZENIT, in which he summarizes the situation of relations between the Vatican and the Assyrian Church of the East.

Q: We seldom hear of the Assyrian Church of the East. Could you say some words on the past and present situation of this particular Church?

Cardinal Kasper: The Assyrian Church of the East is one of the smaller Wastern Churches, at least in the number of the faithful. Its historical roots are in the missionary activity of the early Church, when it moved eastward, in the direction of Mesopotamia and former Babylonia, outside the Roman Empire.

In present day geography, we can say that Iraq is the original homeland of most Assyrian faithful. More recently, due to successive periods of persecution and hardship, a large majority of Assyrian faithful migrated to the West. Nowadays the Assyrian Church has dioceses in Europe, the United States, Canada and Australia. The patriarch himself has his residence in Chicago.

Like other Churches in and from the Middle East, the Assyrian Church of the East faces many challenges. There is the dramatic situation in Iraq, where Christians belonging to various Churches have their very existence seriously threatened. Assyrian faithful are also scattered in different parts of the world, and this does not allow for pastoral service to be assured everywhere by their own priests.

Benedict XVI has mentioned some of these challenges in his address to Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV. He also insisted on the need for and the possibility of further cooperation between Catholic and Assyrian faithful, wherever they live together.

Q: In his address to Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV, Benedict XVI also referred to the positive results of the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East. How did the relations between the Assyrian Church of the East and the Catholic Church develop?

Cardinal Kasper: In 1994, an important Common Christological Declaration was signed by Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV. This declaration clarified some doctrinal controversies between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East, controversies which go back to the Council of Ephesus (431). At that time, the Church of the East could not accept the Catholic concept of incarnation, and therefore also rejected the title which calls the Virgin Mary "Theotokos," "Mother of God."

Indeed, in this early period of doctrinal development, Syriac and Greek terminology did not articulate the same concepts with the same terminology. Nowadays, however, Catholics and Assyrians mutually recognise that they share the same faith in Jesus Christ "true God and true man, perfect in his divinity and perfect in his humanity."

The signing of this Christological Declaration resulted in the creation of a Joint Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East. This commission has met every year between 1994 and 2004 and has done remarkable work.

In this period the commission mainly dealt with issues related to the celebration of the sacraments. Among the most prominent results of this dialogue, I wish to mention the recognition by the Catholic Church of the validity of the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, and the preparation of a comprehensive document on sacramental life, a document which is ready for official endorsement.

In my opinion, however, these important results have not yet received the attention and response they deserve. It is not a matter of signing documents; it is a question that what is endorsed is genuinely accepted in the community.

Q: What happened to the dialogue after 2004? What fears and obstacles does Benedict XVI refer to in his address to the patriarch?

Cardinal Kasper: In 2005, the Assyrian Church unexpectedly decided to suspend the dialogue and not to sign the document which had been prepared on sacramental life. During a meeting in November 2005, moreover, the Synod of the Assyrian Church decided to suspend one of its members, a bishop, who had been among the architects of the dialogue with the Catholic Church and had contributed significantly to its successful progress.

The Catholic Church cannot intervene in the internal affairs of another Church, but deeply regrets this unfortunate development. Nobody is helped by further divisions in a community which already faces so many challenges, as I mentioned before.

These further divisions also cause difficulties for our ecumenical dialogue, since they are improperly used by some Assyrian media to cast doubt on the Catholic Church and its true intentions toward the Assyrian Church; such polemics should be brought to an end. We hope and pray that it will be possible to overcome these problems. Serenity should return and eventually allow the Joint Commission for Theological Dialogue to resume its activities.

This is the sense of the appeal Benedict XVI addressed to Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV and to all concerned, so that together we may find the best solution.

Q: What do you expect from the visit of Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV for the future of relations between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church?

Cardinal Kasper: Immediately after the election of Benedict XVI, Catholicos Mar Dinkha IV expressed the wish to come and greet the new Pope. This may be a hopeful sign for the future of our relations.

Beyond this, I have three expectations. First, that more attention may be given by Catholic and Assyrian faithful worldwide to the difficulties met by their brothers and sisters in the Middle East and particularly in Iraq; these difficulties directly touch the lives of individual Christians and their families, and call for the attention and good will of everyone.

Second, that the results of our dialogue may be further explained and received, so as to allow Catholic and Assyrian faithful to better understand and help one another. Finally, that more effective forms of common witness and joint pastoral activities may be developed between Catholic and Assyrian faithful, particularly in the West, where Christians of all denominations are facing the same pastoral challenges.

What can we do together so that the young generations will be glad to belong to the Church and to give witness to their faith in Christ? These are the kind of questions I would like to see at the center of our future meetings, also with the Assyrian Church of the East.

Q: You also had a working meeting with the patriarch and the bishops who accompanied him. Have any further commitments or projects been made?

Cardinal Kasper: During our meeting, I insisted on the necessity of nurturing a serious and honest relationship. I also expressed the hope that through just and prudent decisions it would be possible to avert further division in the Assyrian Church. It became clear that more frequent contact between the patriarch and Synod of the Assyrian Church and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity would be helpful.

We therefore decided to prepare a third phase of our joint theological dialogue. In this way, I hope, a fresh impetus could be given to relations between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East.

[kosta50]

IOW, the problem the Eastern Orthodox Church has with some Latin dogma has more to do with how & why, rather than what, right?

Quite true, which is why there is hope that one day there might be re-union.

We believe in Grace, but Latins hold that Grace is created (almost like a spiritual commodity); we don't. In Orthodoxy, Grace is God's pure uncreated energy.

We believe in the Real Presence, but we reject the idea that "transubstantiation" explains the mode how it happens. After all, a sacrament means mystery.

We believe the Blessed Ever-Virgin Mary lived a life without sin because she chose to, not because she was ontologically different from us. In other words, her faith and love for God was much greater than that of any other human being.

We believe in particular judgment immediately after death and an interim period for the souls before the Last Judgment. We also pray for the souls of our departed and commemorate them for the benefit of their separated state. We do not think they are being "roasted" (purified) in the Purgatory, but we do admit that souls by themselves were not how God created us and souls separated from bodies are in an unnatural state which may be of great discomfort, which is relieved by prayers and commemorative services.

We accept the Pope as the elder bishop; several ecumenical councils stated so. We disagree on the extent of his jurisdiction over other bishops and especially patriarchs. We do not consider him infallible except when he expresses the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils, and not on his own, or, worse, by circumventing them (such as was the case of BEV Mary's Immaculate Conception dogma).

So, you are right that the Latins do not really believe anything we don't believe, it's how and why they believe it that we find much disagreement with them.

[GoLightly]

We believe in Grace, but Latins hold that Grace is created (almost like a spiritual commodity); we don't. In Orthodoxy, Grace is God's pure uncreated energy.

How does that work out on your end in terms of works?

We believe in the Real Presence, but we reject the idea that "transubstantiation" explains the mode how it happens. After all, a sacrament means mystery.

IMO, Latin understanding puts control of the exact moment in the hands of the Priest, while on your end it happens, but you don't know exactly when. Correct?

Because of the article that began this thread, I looked into the Assyrian Church a bit more & came across more about the Latin "acceptance" of one of the forms used by the Assyrians. Latins claimed all of the elements necessary were there, though the form was rough & spread out.

Something else came up in one of the sources that I came across having to do with leavening. They claim to use a leavening that's been passed down (I think they said since the time of the Apostles) for quite sometime. They said the Latin Church & Eastern Orthodox are different in this area. Is that true, you use a leavened bread?

We believe the Blessed Ever-Virgin Mary lived a life without sin because she chose to, not because she was ontologically different from us. In other words, her faith and love for God was much greater than that of any other human being.

I can buy that, though from my end, I'd have to believe she had extra help. Love is a self replicating thing, where the more you give, the more you get & visa versa.

We believe in particular judgment immediately after death and an interim period for the souls before the Last Judgment. We also pray for the souls of our departed and commemorate them for the benefit of their separated state. We do not think they are being "roasted" (purified) in the Purgatory, but we do admit that souls by themselves were not how God created us and souls separated from bodies are in an unnatural state which may be of great discomfort, which is relieved by prayers and commemorative services.

You caught me in the middle of a letter to the Pastor who's teaching my catechism class. After decades of separation I've picked up some heterodox beliefs in the area of the Creation. I can't help but see created in the past tense. Mankind was created on the sixth day. Adam was *formed* at some point after. I've no idea where we were until we're born. But, Scripture doesn't say that creation is an ongoing thing & while our bodies here on earth are made up or formed out of it's elements, we're more than our physical bodies.

Anyway, if you can give me direction about where y'all get your understanding about the end of life, afterlife, it might be very helpful to me.

We accept the Pope as the elder bishop; several ecumenical councils stated so. We disagree on the extent of his jurisdiction over other bishops and especially patriarchs. We do not consider him infallible except when he expresses the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils, and not on his own, or, worse, by circumventing them (such as was the case of BEV Mary's Immaculate Conception dogma).

First full council after reconciliation looks to be a doozy...

So, you are right that the Latins do not really believe anything we don't believe, it's how and why they believe it that we find much disagreement with them.

Thing is, their positions are dogma & dogma can never be revoked.

[kosta50]

How does that work out on your end in terms of works?

Works are an integral part of faith. Charity, alms giving...but that is not what saves us. Attaining the likeness of Christ, by following Him, by imitating Him, by living the faith,  does. Recapturing the likeness of God we lost by the Fall is salvation.

As far as grace is concerned, it represents God's uncreated energies. We can participate in them, but we can never share His essence.

The Orthodox Church also teaches the original Christian doctrine of ransom redemption.

IMO, Latin understanding puts control of the exact moment in the hands of the Priest, while on your end it happens, but you don't know exactly when. Correct?

The Old or Traditional Latin Mass (sometimes erroneously called "Tridentine"), which has been in use from the 7th century until 1964, does not have a clear epiclesis.  Pope Gregory I, is the creator of the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), aka Mass of Ages. The change involved an active process of deconstructing the previous (Antiochean, distinctly Eastern) liturgy in Latin up to the 5th century, and re-canonizing it into something new. The process included removal of the epiclesis along with other prayers, as well as rearranged the order of prayers relative to the beginning and end of the Latin Mass.

Those who know TLM will tell you that the epiclesis is still there but does not use the word Spirit; rather it uses the word God. I believe the Latins hold that the change happens when the priest raises the host and the cup. The Orthodox make no claim as to when the change takes place; we just know that it does at one point.

(Priest in a low voice) Once again we offer to You this spiritual worship without the shedding of blood, and we ask, pray, and entreat You: send down Your Holy Spirit upon us and upon these gifts here presented.

And make this bread the precious Body of Your Christ. 

(He blesses the holy Bread)

Deacon (in a low voice):  Amen.

Priest (in a low voice):  And that which is in this cup the precious Blood of Your Christ. 

(He blesses the holy Cup.)

Deacon (in a low voice): Amen.

Priest (in a low voice):  Changing them by Your Holy Spirit.

(He blesses them both.)

Deacon (in a low voice):  Amen. Amen. Amen.

As you can tell, the prayers are said in low voice while the choir is chanting. Some Orthodox Churches (especially American) read these prayers aloud and the congregation gestures by deep bows, metanias (bowing down to touch the floor) or even with full prostrations, the "moment" immediately after the triple Amen as if that was the point of change, but there is nothing in the Orthodox theology, as far as I could find, that claims such a thing; it's an entirely American innovation, probably brought in through Protestant converts, and is very unorthodox as far as I am concerned.

Because of the article that began this thread, I looked into the Assyrian Church a bit more & came across more about the Latin "acceptance" of one of the forms used by the Assyrians. Latins claimed all of the elements necessary were there, though the form was rough & spread out.

But it doesn't have the part of the Mystical (aka "Last") Supper where Christ says "Take, eat..."! How can it have "all the elements?" Beside this Nestorian church denies that BEV Mary is the Mother of God.

They said the Latin Church & Eastern Orthodox are different in this area. Is that true, you use a leavened bread?

Yes.

I can buy that, though from my end, I'd have to believe she had extra help.

Then she is not one of us. We cannot look at her as our model. Her sainthood is then "assisted."

I can't help but see created in the past tense. Mankind was created on the sixth day. Adam was *formed* at some point after. I've no idea where we were until we're born.

The teaching of the pre-existence of the souls was a distinctly Gnostic teaching. Origen was specifically condmend by one of the earlier Councils for having taught pre-existence of the souls. The Church has two beliefs visavis the souls, neither one is dogmatic, but the Church steadfastly rejects pre-existence of the souls.

Adam's soul was created when Adam was fashioned out of clay. Eve god Adam's soul because it was the "flesh of his flesh." They had two sons who received their life and so on...Eastern Churches tend to follow this belief (life is propagated from one generation to another, all being the basic life or soul given to Adam). Such belief explains our tendency to sin, as we inherit Adam's fallen nature (his genes and his soul). The other side of the church (mostly western) believe that God creates each and everyone's souls at the moment of conception.  This doctrine does not explain why we are born with corrupt will, as surely God doesn't create a defective soul.

I tend to believe the first. God's creation is a finished act. Therefore everything He set out to create has been created including the human soul, of which we all share.

As to where we were before we were born the answer is we didn't exist. The life of our parents was passed on to us, and they inherited it from their parents and so all the way back to Adam and Eve.

Anyway, if you can give me direction about where y'all get your understanding about the end of life, afterlife, it might be very helpful to me.

The short of it: all men are destined to die once (Heb 9:27), followed by a (particular) judgment. We believe the essence of the particular judgment is no different than the essence of the Last Judgment: we are judged (based on our deeds) to be in eternal bliss or damnation, which will take place after the Last Judgment.

I would like recommend a searchable site called Orthodoxinfo.com and Orthodox Catechism by Archbishop Alfeyev at Mystery of faith

First full council after reconciliation looks to be a doozy...

How so?

Thing is, their positions are dogma & dogma can never be revoked.

True. But dogma may express the same faith even if worded differently or even less than perfectly. There is plenty of room left.