SYNOD OF BISHOPS - 10OCT05 - Intercommunion (with Orthodox Church among topics)

Vatican Press Office ^ | October 10, 2005

[NYer]

Please keep in mind that the bishops are tossing out personal impressions from their own experiences. Nothing is cast in concrete. It's a big world - what works in one culture doesn't always work in another.

This is printed from the official Vatican transcripts. Now let's see how the media rewrites them.

[NYer]

Keep in mind that there are representatives from the Orthodox Churches, and other denominations, present at the Synod. They have no voting privilege, though.

[NYer]

Keep in mind that there are representatives from the Orthodox Churches, and other denominations, present at the Synod. They have no voting privilege, though.

[NYer]

Keep in mind that there are representatives from the Orthodox Churches, and other denominations, present at the Synod. They have no voting privilege, though.

[NYer]

Keep in mind that there are representatives from the Orthodox Churches, and other denominations, present at the Synod. They have no voting privilege, though.

[old and tired]

I had always understood that Catholics were allowed to receive Communion in an Orthodox church if they were so invited. But I've since learned here on FR that is not the case.

Dear friends of ours are Russian Orthodox. They've never received Communion in our family's Masses, though they understand they've always been invited by the priest saying the Mass. However, their church forbids them to take Communion in a Catholic Mass.

[NYer]

Dear friends of ours are Russian Orthodox. They've never received Communion in our family's Masses, though they understand they've always been invited by the priest saying the Mass. However, their church forbids them to take Communion in a Catholic Mass.

We have a Greek Orthodox family that occasionally attend Divine Liturgy at our church. Our missalettes give the guidelines for reception of communion indicating the Catholic Church's welcome to the Orthodox to receive communion. This family, from Jordan, goes up for communion. Perhaps it's cultural?

[old and tired]

This family, from Jordan, goes up for communion. Perhaps it's cultural?

Or maybe a difference between the Russian and Greek Orthodox churches? Also, I'm wondering if it may be that there is no Greek Orthodox church easily accessible to the family you know. Maybe it's ok in special circumstances? Sort of like we Catholics can go to an Orthodox priest for Confession if we believe ourselves in mortal sin and no Catholic priest is available. I really don't know.

[Kolokotronis]

Thanks for the post. Each intervention speaks to a different aspect of the Eucharist and I especially like the one from +Menghisteab of Eritrea. It is "ontologically" Orthodox.

The one from the Exarch for Serbia and Montegnegro is certainly more cautious in that he recognizes that..."the Eucharist cannot be the means for communion, not even the means for building a generic human community. The Eucharist is not even a starting point." This is a distinctly Orthodox point of view, which understands that the Eucharist is, among other things, a symbol of unity. That unity does not yet exist. I suspect he would say, at this time, that intercommunion is a fraud.

Finally, the interesting, if somewhat disingenuous, questions of +Lubomyr of Kiev. He asks:

"If the Liturgy is a regula fidei (lex orandi, lex credendi)

- if the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Oriental Churches in communion with the See of Rome and by the Orthodox or Apostolical Churches is identical for both,

-if there is mutual recognition of the Apostolic Succession of Bishops and, consequently, of priests that celebrate it, then my question is: what more is required for unity?"

Let's assume for the moment that everything he says is true. He knows the answer as well as his own name.

" Is there maybe another fons or another culmen superior to the Eucharist?"

Yes, an infallible, monarchical papacy claiming universal jurisdiction over the whole Church. + Lubomyr knows this as well as I do. he isn't speaking to the Orthodox in the hall, he's speaking to the Pope. Once again this rather odd, but very interesting and maybe brave, man is right in the face of Latin ecclesiology. He is a man to watch; from the Roman standpoint, maybe the proverbial "man on horseback".

[Theophane]

Many years, Patriarch LUBOMYR!

[TruthNtegrity]

Just a FYI, in case you missed this.

[sionnsar]

Most interesting. Thank you!

[JohnRoss]

From my understanding, many Eastern Catholic academics have argued for dual communion, akin to the situation that currently exists with ROCOR.

Although, ROCOR is working to restore full communion with the Moscow Patriarchate, it currently only shares communion with the Church of Serbia and the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, yet those churches are also in communion with Moscow.

Prior to the establishment of the Melkite Church in 1729, intercommunion between Roman Catholics and Orthodox was not unheard of. Several 17th century Patriarchs of Antioch were in communion with both Rome and Orthodoxy. Bishop Kallistos' works include mention of Orthodox participation in Roman Catholic Corpus Christi processions in the Venetian-held islands during the 17th century.

[Kolokotronis]

"Prior to the establishment of the Melkite Church in 1729, intercommunion between Roman Catholics and Orthodox was not unheard of. Several 17th century Patriarchs of Antioch were in communion with both Rome and Orthodoxy."

Well, yes and no. After the Great Schism, Rome certainly tried hard, through the French, to get a hold of the whole Patriarchate of Antioch. The measure of its success is the present day Melkite Church which came into formal union with Rome in the 18th century.

"Bishop Kallistos' works include mention of Orthodox participation in Roman Catholic Corpus Christi processions in the Venetian-held islands during the 17th century."

There are a couple of small "Catholic" Greek Islands to this day where there are very close ties between the Orthodox and the Catholics but these ties don't amount to anything like intercommunion. That does go on in Lebanon however.

"From my understanding, many Eastern Catholic academics have argued for dual communion, akin to the situation that currently exists with ROCOR."

I've never heard of this. Looking to become a canonical anomoly like ROCOR has been, but won't be much longer, doesn't seem to me to be such a great idea. What would it accomplish? I suppose for purely nationalistic reasons, which would run right into charges of the heresy of phyletism, the Ukranian Greek Catholics might want to establish such a union in Ukraine, but the reaction in the rest of Orthodoxy would be extremely negative. For that reason alone, I suspect, Rome would also be against it.

[Teófilo]

My experience is that the Orthodox Churches will not let their faithful communicate in a Catholic Church unless it is a dire emergency; Traditionalist bodies like Old Calendar Orthodox Churches don't even consider the Church of Rome as a Catholic Church with valid sacraments; for them the Roman See has been vacant since the Great Schism and Apostolic Succession interrupted.

For the Orthodox Traditionalists, the question isn't even academic: for them to receive communion from a Catholic priest is like a Catholic receiving it from a Mormon minister, iow, "there's nothing there"--pace Mormons. Therefore they don't do it.

I don't understand these prelates agitating for intercommunion with the Orthodox when we can't even agree with them if we hold the same faith in common. The Orthodox seem to be sure of what they believe in order to justify their reluctance against intercommunion. I humbly suggest that we do the same.

-Theo

[Kolokotronis]

"I don't understand these prelates agitating for intercommunion with the Orthodox when we can't even agree with them if we hold the same faith in common. The Orthodox seem to be sure of what they believe in order to justify their reluctance against intercommunion. I humbly suggest that we do the same."

Good advice, Theo. Sometimes it seems having dialogue with the Latin Church is like trying to hit a moving target blindfolded. One Orthodox Metropolitan, a man who admires the Latin Church, once told me that he had told one of his Cardinal friends that he'd really prefer it if the Latin Church could simply settle down on what it really believes and who is really a Catholic and then it would be time to talk. In the meantime, he always enjoyed dinner and a good cigar with the Cardinal. :)

[jec1ny]

As I have noted in several other discussions on the same or similar topic, current church law does NOT permit reception of Communion by Orthodox except under highly unusual circumstances. I continue to be surprised and slightly disturbed at how widespread this abuse is.

[JohnRoss]

I understand this, and I know that Benedic XVI rejected the Melkite initiative when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger.

I think the Catholic intelligentsia are well meaning, but naive. The biggest issue is that both sides claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and nothing is going to change that.

[Teófilo]

Good advice, Theo. Sometimes it seems having dialogue with the Latin Church is like trying to hit a moving target blindfolded. One Orthodox Metropolitan, a man who admires the Latin Church, once told me that he had told one of his Cardinal friends that he'd really prefer it if the Latin Church could simply settle down on what it really believes and who is really a Catholic and then it would be time to talk. In the meantime, he always enjoyed dinner and a good cigar with the Cardinal.

Is not that the Orthodox lack things needing clarification themselves. The issue of the "Aerial Toll Houses" comes to mind.

Are there literal "toll houses" on the way to heaven? Is this Purgatory a la Orthodox? More things needing clarification.

-Theo

[Victoria Delsoul]

Please keep in mind that the bishops are tossing out personal impressions from their own experiences. Nothing is cast in concrete. It's a big world - what works in one culture doesn't always work in another.

Thanks for the reminder.