Replies

I would imagine that this poses another problem for reunification since there have been councils in the West that the East will never fully recognize. I hope you will excuse me from any specifics here as I know very little (virtually nothing, really) about any of the councils in the West since 1054.

I don't want to wade in too deeply into this either.

It doesn't seem clear to me that the uniates like the Melkites or Romanians or Chaldeans have been asked to change themselves in conformance to councils of which they were not a part. The Melkites, for example, list as normative the first 8 councils, I believe, and then the last two, beause those were the ones the Patriarch of Antioch participated in. I believe they are asked to accept and understand these councils, but not necessarily to adopt their terminology. The Melkites, especially, are quite interesting. They proclaim themselves to be fully Orthodox and of no different a belief than the other Orthodox, but that they are in communion with Rome. Their official website lists the first 8 councils, I think, and the the last two (Vatican I and II). The others are not there because the Melkite Patriarch of Antioch was excluded from them.

The reception of the Catholic councils held since the 12th century, and the Orthodox councils in 1285, 1341/51, and 1672 would require some sort of adoption or subscription via another council which would harmonize the decrees, or leave their interpretation flexible enough to accomodate theological strains of both Church which are in harmony, but not necessarily identical (just as Catholics have Thomists, Molinists, Congruists, etc. in the doctrine of grace and free will). As an historical example, the Persian Church, the Church of the East, was not represented at Nicea. The creed and canons were brought to them by the Roman Church in AD 410 and they were subscribed to at that time.

Obviously there is a great conformity between some of these councils. The decress of the Council of Jerusalem in 1672 by the Orthodox are almost identical the those of Trent. Not a big surprise, they were both held against Protestants.

It doesn't seem clear to me that the uniates like the Melkites or Romanians or Chaldeans have been asked to change themselves in conformance to councils of which they were not a part.

To the best of my knowledge, they have not.

A Byzantine Catholic priest nearby has stated that they do not accept the teachings of Vatican I. I mentioned this to catholicguy once and he said the priest didn't sound very [Roman] Catholic to him. Being faced with a situation where the priest is claiming obedience to the Pope but rejecting (at least) some of the Western councils, I believe catholicguy was correct but I truly don't know what to make of it all.