News From the Eastern Front. Pan-Orthodox Council in Crete, While in Athens...

Chiesa ^ | 01-30-2016 | Sandro Magister

[NRx]

News From the Eastern Front. Pan-Orthodox Council in Crete, While in Athens...

Agreement and disagreement among the Churches of Orthodoxy, on the verge of their first council after more than a thousand years. And from Rome a slap in the face for the Greek Church, with the appointment of a new Catholic and Latin bishop

by Sandro Magister

ROME, January 30, 2016 - There are two new developments on the front of the Eastern Churches, one huge and one tiny.

The tiny one is the appointment of the new apostolic exarch of Byzantine-rite Catholics living in Greece, in essence the new Catholic bishop of Athens, the announcement of which will be made in early February.

Greece is home to the most minuscule and problematic of the Eastern Catholic Churches. It has only three parishes and 6,000 faithful, among whom there are just a thousand Greeks, the others being Ukrainians and Chaldeans of recent immigration.

It was born a century and a half ago through the proselytizing impulse of the first of its bishops, Ioannis Marangos, a Latin in Byzantine vestments, installed in Athens in 1875 but investigated and removed two years later by the Holy Office, both for debts he contracted and for sexual relations with sisters of a congregation that he himself had founded.

The Greek Orthodox Church has always considered this implantation as an extremely serious instance of trespassing. So much so that both in 1975, with Paul VI, and in 2008, with Benedict XVI, it insistently asked the Holy See to discontinue the appointment of a Catholic bishop on Greek soil, for such a minuscule community.

But in vain. In 1975, the pontifical council for Christian unity, headed at the time by Cardinal Johannes Willebrands, had formally assured the holy synod of the Greek Orthodox Church that when the bishop passed away he would be replaced not with another bishop but with a dignitary not granted the episcopal character. But a surprise move by the Vatican congregation for the Oriental Churches, with jurisdiction over the exarchate of Athens both then and now, persuaded Paul VI to give in and install as successor the bishop Anargiros Printesis.

The Greek Orthodox Church reacted strongly and in writing to the appointment, which was also criticized by then-patriarch of Constantinople Dimitrios.

But in 2008 the outcome was the same. Once again Rome installed a bishop in Athens, the Greek Dimitrios Salachas, who most recently made the news for being included by Pope Francis - as a voice of the pastoral mercy called "oikonomia" typical of the East - on the commission that prepared the muddle-headed reform of annulment procedures that went into effect last December 8.

From Pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio as well, the Greek Orthodox Church was looking for a non-episcopal succession to Salachas, who is retiring for reasons of age, having passed his 75th year. And yet it would be disappointed twice over, because the successor designated would be not only a bishop, but a non-Greek at that.

In fact, since the Catholic exarchate of Athens had only six priests who for various reasons could not be candidates, the Vatican congregation for the Oriental Churches, headed by Argentine cardinal Leonardo Sandri, went fishing elsewhere for a successor. And imprudently it selected him in the person of Manuel Nin, a Benedictine monk, once again a Latin in Byzantine vestments, the current rector of the Pontifical Greek College in Rome, which in the eyes of the Greeks is still the institution founded in 1577 to prepare Catholic missionaries to send to Hellas to convert the Orthodox.

Fr. Nin's value as a theologian, liturgist, and expert on on the Christian East is attested to by his frequent writings in "L'Osservatore Romano" and by his books. But there is no doubt that his appointment as the new apostolic exarch of Athens - which will be made public in a few days - will be judged as the latest of many slaps in the face by the Greek Orthodox hierarchy, already one of the most viscerally hostile not only to Rome but also to its sister Orthodox Churches most engaged in ecumenical dialogue.

*

Now we come to the other new development, the huge one.

The pan-Orthodox council will take place. The heads of the autocephalous Orthodox Churches have finally decided on it, at a recent meeting in Chambésy, Switzerland, on Lake Geneva (see photo), to overcome the last obstacles to the celebration of this event, not convened for more than a thousand years.

It will be held from June 16-27 of this year on the island of Crete, a few miles from the coastal city of Chania, in the accommodations of the modern and welcoming Orthodox Academy built in the 1960's with the spiritual patronage of the patriarchate of Constantinople and with money from the Evangelical Church of Germany:

> Orthodox Academy of Crete

On Sunday, June 19, the feast of Pentecost on the Eastern calendar, the liturgy will be celebrated in Heraklion at the cathedral of Saint Minas.

Previously, the setting anticipated for the council was the cathedral of Constantinople, the church of Saint Irene in Istanbul, but the crisis that erupted between Moscow and Ankara after the downing of the Russian jet on the border with Syria forced a change of venue.

And the patriarchate of Moscow willingly accepted the move to Crete. The rivalry between the powerful Russian Church, which encompasses two thirds of the world's Orthodox population, and the ecumenical patriarchate of Constantinople, which numbers less than three thousand faithful in Istanbul but boasts a primacy of honor over all of Orthodoxy, has in fact been for years one of the most serious conflicts within the Christian East, with important repercussions for relations with the Church of Rome:

> The Russian Veto Against Francis and Bartholomew (8.1.2014)

This is one of the reasons behind the great importance of the speeches given in Chambésy on January 22 by the religious leaders of the "Second Rome" and of the "Third Rome," delivered in Greek and Russian respectively but conveniently made available in English.

That of the patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew:

> Keynote Address by His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew...

And that of the patriarch of Moscow and all Rus', Kirill:

> Patriarch Kirill Addresses the Sinaxis...

The first of the two speeches is especially helpful in reconstructing the genesis and agenda of the upcoming assembly.

But it is also important to read the final account of the assembly, published in English by the patriarchate of Moscow:

> Synaxis of Primates of Local Orthodox Church completes its work in Geneva

in Chambésy an agreement "in extremis" was reached on the procedural rules of the next pan-Orthodox council, without which it could not have gone forward. The rules have been condensed into sixteen articles and concern the convocation of the council, its structure, the powers of the presidency and secretariat, the organization of the work, the approval of texts, the presence of observers of the non-Orthodox Churches.

The text of the rules is available in English on the website of the patriarchate of Moscow:

> Organization and Working Procedure...

It must be noted, however, that the patriarchate of Antioch has not signed on to the rules endorsed by all the other delegates, in practice holding in reserve the threat of withdrawing from the council and therefore invalidating it without the prior resolution of its dispute with the patriarchate of Jerusalem over its appointment of a metropolitan in Qatar, an appointment judged as illegitimate by Antioch.

But as for the matters to be discussed in the council, a full agreement has been reached on four of the eight preparatory documents.

The documents approved concern:

- the autonomy of the Churches and the manner of proclaiming it;
- the importance of fasting and its observance today;
- relations of the Orthodox Church with the rest of the Christian world;
- the mission of the Orthodox Church in the contemporary world in terms of peace, freedom, and fraternity among peoples.

(With regard to this last point, in Chambésy the patriarchate of Moscow secured the approval of the other Orthodox Churches for its conduct in the crisis in Ukraine).

A fifth document has been approved by everyone except for the patriarchate of Antioch. And it concerns "the sacrament of marriage and its impediments."

The texts of these five documents are also available in French on the website of the patriarchate of Moscow:

> https://mospat.ru/fr

The texts not approved instead concern:

- the autocephaly of the national Churches and a process for implementing it;
- the "diptychs," meaning the hierarchical organization among the Churches and its recognition in liturgical celebrations;
- the establishment of a common calendar among the Orthodox Churches and prospectively among all the Christian Churches, in particular on the date of Easter.

This last point is one that Moscow patriarch Kirill has said he is particularly opposed to discussing.

The duration of the pan-Orthodox council will be brief, just twelve days. But broad-based interest has emerged in holding more of them, at intervals of five or ten years.

Invitations will be issued - but only for the opening and closing sessions - to representatives of other Christian Churches, following the example of the non-Catholic observers at Vatican Council II. For the Catholic Church, the first invitation will likely go to Cardinal Kurt Koch, president of the pontifical council for Christian unity.

What happens at the pan-Orthodox council will show what kind of new equilibrium will emerge between the two most significant leaders of all Orthodoxy, Kirill and Bartholomew.

Kirill plainly intends, in fact, to strip Bartholomew of his exclusive status as the top symbolic representative of Orthodoxy in the world, which Bartholomew enjoys partly due to the excellent relations that he maintains with the Church of Rome and the pope.

And this is also why the patriarch of Moscow has a compelling interest in expediting his meeting with Pope Francis, the first in history between the heads of the respective Churches. Perhaps with a surprise move during their respective trips to Cuba and Mexico, scheduled for both around the middle of February:

> Francis and Kirill Together, Under Tropical Skies

The spokesman of the patriarchate of Moscow reacted to the forecast made by www.chiesa of a possible meeting between Kirill and Francis in the Caribbean - on which both sides continue to work in secret - with words more of evasion than of denial:

> Russian Orthodox Church denies rumors of upcoming Patriarch-Pope meeting in Latin America

Because one thing is certain. The patriarch of Moscow still wants to meet with the pope before and not after the pan-Orthodox council in June, in order to capitalize on the powerful symbolic effect of the gesture and to spend it to his advantage during the big assembly.

__________


English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.

[NRx]

I wouldn't pay much attention to the first item in this piece. It really is pretty trivial. The second part has some interesting insights, though there are areas where his interpretation of events (or possible future events) is dicey. And of course he repeats the claim that we (Orthodox) have not had a council in over a thousand years, ignoring the IX Ecumenical Council (1341-51).

[vladimir998]

” ignoring the IX Ecumenical Council (1341-51).”

Were any of the attendees not Greek? Wasn’t really a series of patriarchal synods than anything approaching an “ecumenical council”???

And the typical hypocrisy of the Greeks is on displace. They are upset over ONE Greek Catholic bishop in Greece when there are many Greek Orthodox bishops in countries that are historically Catholic countries. The Greek Orthodox are like emotional women.

[vladimir998]

Oops! “display” not “displace”.

[NRx]

The individual councils have been collectively received by the Church. That is the bottom line criteria in Orthodoxy. They are recognized by all of the canonical Orthodox Churches as having the same standing as the first eight Councils,. So yes, they collectively constitute the IX Great and Holy Council of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

[vladimir998]

“The individual councils have been collectively received by the Church.”

No, only the Orthodox Churches. The Church has not collectively received the series of Eastern Orthodox (read mostly Greek) synods from the 1340s.

“That is the bottom line criteria in Orthodoxy. They are recognized by all of the canonical Orthodox Churches as having the same standing as the first eight Councils.”

Which is an irrelevant recognition since national/ethnic Churches cannot supersede the universal authority of the Church.

“So yes, they collectively constitute the IX Great and Holy Council of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.”

Except that they aren’t a council but a series of synods, and no “recognition” can displace the fact that the Ninth Ecumenical Council of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church already happened in 1123.

Other than that, gee, everything is just hunky-dory.

By the way, even some Eastern Orthodox would reject the 1340s synods as being “Ecumenical Councils”:

“When asked whether the forthcoming council [2016] is ecumenical, Legoyda said: “The council, the preparation of which is entering its final phase, is called the Holy and Great, sometimes Pan-Orthodox. Calling it ecumenical is not accepted and is incorrect. The last ecumenical council was convened in Nicaea in 787, and since then such councils have not convened. Following the schism in 1054, ecumenical councils were held in the West. However, in the East they are not recognized as such…””

http://www.pravmir.com/russian-orthodox-church-consider-2016-orthodox-council-ecumenical/

So, if the Russkies don’t accept the 1340s synods as “Ecumenical” are they no longer Orthodox, or are you just blowing smoke about it being “Ecumenical”?

[Campion]

Wikipedia page for the "Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy and Malta" whose bishop evidently resides in Venice. ;-)

[Biggirl]

And I thought that the complaints would come from the Russian Orthodox, but then, could it be more nationalist-driven?

[livius]

The Greeks are kind of nutty and prize being Greek over anything else. Even here in the US, we’ve had non-Greek priests and even congregants driven out of Greek churches by the immigrant Greeks (there’s still a Greek immigration going on, since Greece is so dysfunctional nowadays).

I hope the Russians get the upper hand. They are much more faith-oriented (that is, they understand Orthodoxy as being about religious truth and not about ethnicism) and, while any autocephalous church is going to be too nationalistic and ethno-centric, they’re better than most at making the transition (such as to the OCA in the US).

[vladimir998]

“And I thought that the complaints would come from the Russian Orthodox, but then, could it be more nationalist-driven?”

Well, the Eastern Orthodox Churches are riddled with nationalism and always have been. Take my nickname, for instance. Vladimir is a common Russian Orthodox name. If I actually joined ROCOR (Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia) I might very well be expected to take a specifically Russian or generally “Orthodox” name. I have a friend who joined a Western Rite branch of an Orthodox Church and took the name “Ambrose” after St. Ambrose of Milan. There’s nothing wrong with that, but why would I be expected to choose, say, “Vladimir” rather than “Walter” - which is the English way of saying Vladimir after all. Why? Because these Orthodox Churches are really ethnic/national Churches.

Here’s another example:

“What is special about the seminary in Jordanville is that instruction is exclusively in Russian. In earlier days, uttering the English language could result in punishment in the form of prostrations, such was the strictness of rule. But this had its pluses, for the present Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Metropolitan Hilarion, learned Russian during his time in Jordanville. And he wasn’t alone; for many future pastors of the Russian Church Abroad, Jordanville opened the door to the treasury of Russian Orthodox culture, which is simply unimaginable without the Russian language and divine services in Church Slavonic.”

I don’t care that they have instruction in Russian in Jordanville. But it is a NATIONAL language. Latin, at least, was not a national language but an international language of education, culture and faith.

“Those Americans who have met with true Orthodoxy have been unable to abandon it, many have been obliged to learn the Russian language, Russian culture and Church Slavonic services.”

Did you see that? “Obliged to learn the Russian language”? I have nothing against studying Russian - did it myself way back when. But “obliged to learn Russian”? And this is not to study holy things on a deep level, or become a priest, but simply to simply live as a ROCOR Church-going member.

Even the people writing this know this isn’t right:

“The fathers who founded the monastery left a legacy to preserve the Russian Orthodox services in Church Slavonic, but today more and more Americans want to learn about Orthodox Christianity. Forcing them to learn the Russian language would seem unreasonable. At the time, the main goal of Russians living abroad was to preserve the traditions of their Russian culture. One cannot say that today, this goal has lost its purpose, but at the same time we cannot hinder the local population from converting to Orthodoxy.”

http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/engdocuments/enart_orthodoxyinamerica.html

[vladimir998]

Malta???

That’s interesting because I saw census figures that say Malta is 98% Catholic which means the Eastern Orthodox population can’t be much more than 1% at most. Thus, the population of Catholics in Greece is HIGHER (in percentages and in real population) than the EO population of Malta and yet the Greeks are whining like hurt little girls that we might send a bishop to Greece. Typical.

[Verginius Rufus]

This is talking about Byzantine-rite Catholics in Greece. There are also Roman rite Catholics in Greece, a legacy of Venetian rule. Some of the islands remained under Venice for a long time after the Turks conquered the Greek mainland. I think the island of Syros has quite a few Catholics although I don’t know what percentage they are of the island’s total population. There is a Catholic cathedral in Athens—when I lived there, there was a large number of people there for Sunday Mass (but I don’t know how many were tourists or non-Greeks residing in Athens).

[Biggirl]

The last few years, been doing research on the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches via going online. Those branches of the Church are rare gems indeed.

Also could it be that Eastern Rite Catholic Churches because they accept the leadership of the Pope are not as “riddled” with nationalism as the Orthodox counterpart?

[vladimir998]

“This is talking about Byzantine-rite Catholics in Greece.”

Yes, I know that. Nothing changes because of that point.

[vladimir998]

“Also could it be that Eastern Rite Catholic Churches because they accept the leadership of the Pope are not as “riddled” with nationalism as the Orthodox counterpart?”

That could be.