Posted on 05/29/2007 8:53:16 AM PDT by kawaii
28 May 2007, 12:17
Orthodox-Catholic Commission for Theological Dialogue to discuss primacy of the Pope of Rome and Patriarch of Constantinople at the meeting in October in Italy
Vienna, May 28, Interfax - The Moscow Patriarchate intends to assert its own position in the discussion on the primacy of the Pope of Rome in Christendom at the second meeting of the Joint Orthodox-Catholic Theological Commission to take place in October in Ravenna, Italy.
‘Our principal affirmation is this: primacy in the Church is necessary, also on the universal level, but on the level of the Universal Church it cannot be the primacy of jurisdiction but only the primacy of honour’, Bishop Hilarion of Vienna and Austria, Russian Church representative to European organizations, told Interfax on Monday.
‘There can be no compromises’ in this matter for the Moscow Patriarchate, he said. The aim of the theological dialogue is not to make a compromise but to identify the original understanding of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome in the early undivided Church, he noted.
‘Historically, the primacy of the Bishop of Rome in the Christian Church, from our point of view, was that of honour, not jurisdiction. That is to say, the jurisdiction of the Pope of Rome was never applied to all the Churches’, the bishop stressed.
He recalls that in the second millennium, the Pope of Rome have become ‘de facto Patriarch of the West’, while in the East the Church is headed by four patriarchs of local Orthodox Churches.
After the breakup with Rome, primacy in the Orthodox world ‘shifted automatically as it were to Constantinople, though all the early canons ascribe to the Bishop of Constantinople the second place after the Bishop of Rome; no canon speaks of the primacy of Constantinople’, the bishop noted.
‘We consider it (the primacy of Constantinople - IF) exclusively as primacy of honour, while the See of Constantinople itself tends occasionally to give a broad interpretation to this primacy. These are the questions I believe around which principal problems will emerge’, Bishop Hilarion said.
He says the Moscow Patriarchate is drafting a special document to reflect the official point of view of the Russian Orthodox Church on primacy in the Universal Church in general and the primacies of the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople in particular.
See the full text of interview under the Exclusive heading.
Well, they knew folks were going to get them mixed up when they started recycling those names, now didn’t they!
But not as bad as the French Kings, who are all named Louis or Henry.
No, it doesn't because it's already made clear that the instrument of opening and closing, or loosening and binding are the keys. So, how else but with the keys promised to +Peter first, are the Apostles to achieve the same? Nowhere does it say that the power to bind and loosen is exclusively +Peter's.
Kosta: "No, it doesn't because it's already made clear that the instrument of opening and closing, or loosening and binding are the keys. So, how else but with the keys promised to +Peter first, are the Apostles to achieve the same? Nowhere does it say that the power to bind and loosen is exclusively +Peter's."
The Fathers are pretty consistent, AB on this and they write as Kosta says the NT implies. Here's a snip from Origen's (as most of you know, Origen isn't my favorite, but he is very early), Second Book of the Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew, Bk XII, which is consistent with later patristic writing:
"The Promise Given to Peter Not Restricted to Him, But Applicable to All Disciples Like Him.
But if you suppose that upon that one Peter only the whole church is built by God, what would you say about John the son of thunder or each one of the Apostles? Shall we otherwise dare to say, that against Peter in particular the gates of Hades shall not prevail, but that they shall prevail against the other Apostles and the perfect? Does not the saying previously made, “The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it,” hold in regard to all and in the case of each of them? And also the saying, “Upon this rock I will build My church”? Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter only, and will no other of the blessed receive them? But if this promise, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,” be common to the others, how shall not all the things previously spoken of, and the things which are subjoined as having been addressed to Peter, be common to them? For in this place these words seem to be addressed as to Peter only, Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,” etc; but in the Gospel of John the Saviour having given the Holy Spirit unto the disciples by breathing upon them said, “Receive ye the Holy Spirit,” etc. Many then will say to the Saviour, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God; ”but not all who say this will say it to Him, as not at all having learned it by the revelation of flesh and blood but by the Father in heaven Himself taking away the veil that lay upon their heart, in order that after this “with unveiled face reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord” they may speak through the Spirit of God saying concerning Him, “Lord Jesus,” and to Him, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And if any one says this to Him, not by flesh and blood revealing it unto Him but through the Father in heaven, he will obtain the things that were spoken according to the letter of the Gospel to that Peter, but, as the spirit of the Gospel teaches, to every one who becomes such as that Peter was. For all bear the surname of “rock” who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of the rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters." (formatted this way in the original)
1. St. Aphraates the Sage in A.D. 330:
[King] David handed over the Kingdom to [Prince] Solomon and was gathered to his people; and Jesus handed over the Keys to Simon and ascended and returned to Him Who sent Him.2. St. Anthony of Egypt in A.D. 330:
(xxi, 13).
Peter, the Prince of the Apostles...3. St. Ephraem:
(Epist. xvii. Galland, iv p. 687)
Then Peter deservedly received the Vicariate of Christ over His people." (Sermon de Martyrio. SS. App. Petri et Pauli)4. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Patriarch in A.D. 363:[As if spoken by Jesus:] "Simon my follower, I have made you the foundation of My holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of all who will build on earth a Church for Me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which My teaching flows, you are the chief of My disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is the life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the first-born in My institution, and so that, as the heir, you may be the executor of all My treasures. I have given you the keys of My Kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all My treasures!
To whom, O Lord, didst Thou entrust that most precious pledge of the heavenly keys? To Bar Jonas, the Prince of the Apostles, with whom, I implore Thee, may I share Thy bridal chamber...Our Lord chose Simon Peter and appointed him chief of the Apostles, foundation of the holy Church and guardian of His establishment. He appointed him head of the Apostles and commanded him to feed His flock and teach it laws for preserving the purity of its beliefs.
(Homilies, 4:1, 350 A.D.)
Peter, the chief and foremost leader of the Apostles, before a little maid thrice denied the Lord, but moved to penitence, he wept bitterly. (Catech ii. n. 15)5.St. Nyssa in 371:
The memory of Peter, the Head of the Apostles, is celebrated; and magnified indeed with him are the other members of the Church; but [upon him] is the Church of God firmly established. For he is, agreeably to the gift conferred upon him by the Lord, that unbroken and most firm Rock upon which the Lord built His Church.6. St. Macarius of Egypt in 371:
(alt. Or. De S. Steph. Galland. t. vi.)
Moses was succeeded by Peter, who had committed to his hands the new Church of Christ, and the true priesthood.7. St. Epiphanius of Salamis in 385:
(Hom. xxvi. n. 23, p. 101)
Holy men are therefore called the temple of God, because the Holy Spirit dwells in them; as that Chief of the Apostles testifies, he that was found to be blessed by the Lord, because the Father had revealed unto him. To him then did the Father reveal His true Son; and the same [Peter] furthermore reveals the Holy Spirit. This was befitting in the First of the Apostles, that firm Rock upon which the Church of God is built, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The gates of hell are heretics and heresiarchs. For in every way was the faith confirmed in him who received the keys of heaven; who looses on earth and binds in heaven. For in him are found all subtle questions of faith. He was aided by the Father so as to be (or lay) the Foundation of the security (firmness) of the faith. He (Peter) heard from the same God, 'feed my lambs'; to him He entrusted the flock; he leads the way admirably in the power of his own Master.8. St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople c. A.D. 387:
(T. ii. in Anchor)
Peter, that Leader of the choir, that Mouth of the rest of the Apostles, that Head of the brotherhood, that one set over the entire universe, that Foundation of the Church.9. In 514 Pope Hormisdas was addressed by about two hundred Archimandrites, Priests and Deacons of Syria:
(In illud hoc Scitote)[Peter], the foundation of the Church, the Coryphaeus of the choir of the Apostles, the vehement lover of Christ ...he who ran throughout the whole world, who fished the whole world; this holy Coryphaeus of the blessed choir; the ardent disciple, who was entrusted with the keys of heaven, who received the spiritual revelation. Peter, the mouth of all Apostles, the head of that company, the ruler of the whole world.
(De Eleemos, iii. 4; Hom. de decem mille tal. 3)And why, then, passing by the others, does He converse with Peter on these things? (John 21:15). He was the chosen one of the Apostles, and the mouth of the disciples, and the leader of the choir. On this account, Paul also went up on a time to see him rather than the others (Galatians 1:18). And withal, to show him that he must thenceforward have confidence, as the denial was done away with, He puts into his hands the presidency over the brethren. And He brings not forward the denial, nor reproches him with what had past, but says, 'If you love me, preside over the brethren, ...and the third time He gives him the same injunction, showing what a price He sets the presidency over His own sheep. And if one should say, 'How then did James receive the throne of Jerusalem?,' this I would answer that He appointed this man [Peter] teacher, not of that throne, but of the whole world.
(Chrysostom, In Joan. Hom. 1xxxviii. n. 1, tom. viii)
To the most holy and blesssed Patriarch of the whole earth, Hormisdas, holding the See of Peter, Prince of the Apostles, the entreaty and supplication of the humble Archimandrites and other Monks of the province of Second Syria.10. From the Metropolitan of Cyprus in 643:Since Christ our God has appointed you Chief Pastor, and Teacher, and Physician of souls, we beseech you, therefore, most blessed Father, to arise, and justly condole with the Body torn to pieces, for ye are the Head of all, and avenge the Faith despised, the Canons trodden under foot, the Father blasphemed. The Flock itself comes forward to recognize its own Shepherd in you its true Pastor and Doctor, to whom the care of the sheep is entrusted for their salvation.
To the most blessed Father of Fathers, Archbishop and Universal Patriarch, [Pope] Theodore, Sergius, the humble Bishop, health in the Lord.11. The petition of Stephen, Bishop of Dora, first member of the Synod of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, read in the Lateran Council of Pope Martin in 649:Christ our God hath established thy Apostolic See, O Sacred Head, as a divinely-fixed immovable foundation, whereupon the faith is brightly inscribed. For "Thou art Peter," as the Divine Word truly pronounced, and on thy foundation the pillars of the Church are fixed. Into thy hands He put the keys of the heavens, and pronounced that thou shouldest bind and loose in earth and heaven with power.
Who shall give us the wings of a dove, that we may fly and report this to your supreme See, which rules and is set over all, that the wound may be entirely healed! For this the great Peter, the Head of the Apostles, has been wont to do with power from of old, by his Apostolical or Canonical authority; since manifestly not only he alone beside all thought worthy to be entrusted with the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to open and to shut these, worthily of believing, but justly to those unbelieving the Gospel of grace. Not to say that he first was set in charge to feed the sheep of the whole Catholic Church>; for He says, "Peter, lovest thou Me? Feed my sheep." And again, in a manner special and peculiar to himself, having a stronger faith that all in our Lord, and unchangeable, to convert and confirm his spiritual partners and brethren, when tossed by doubt, having had power and sacerdotal authority providently committed to him by the very God for our sakes Incarnate. Which, knowing Sophronius, of blessed memory, Patriarch of the holy city of Christ our God,—placed me on Holy Calvary,—and there bound me with indissoluble bonds, saying "Thou shalt give account to our God Who on this sacred spot was willingly sacrificed in the flesh for us, at His glorious and dreadful appearing, when He shall judge the living and the dead, if thou delay and neglect His Faith endangered: though I, as thou knowest, cannot do this personally, for the inroad of the Saracens, which has burst on us for our sins. Go then with all speed from one end of the earth to the other, till thou come to the Apostolic See, where the foundations of the true faith are laid.12. In 650, St. Maximus, Abbot of Constantinople writes:
Let him hasten before all to satisfy the Roman See. That done, all will every where, with one accord, hold him pious and orthodox. For he merely talks idly when he thinks of persuading and imposing on such like as me, and does not satisfy and implore the most blessed Pope of the most holy Roman Church, that is, the Apostolic See, which from the very Incarnate Word of God, but also from all holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and rules has received and holds in all persons, and for all things, empire, authority, and power to bind and to loose, over the universal holy Churches of God, which are in all the world. For when this binds and looses, so also does the Word in heaven, who rules the celestial virtues.6. Nor can these statements be dismissed as the opinions of isolated individuals. In the year 500, the bishops of the East wishing to end the schism of Acacius addressed Pope Symmachus with the following words:
But do thou, as an affectionate father among children, beholding us perishing by the prevarication of our Father Acacius, not delay; who art daily taught by the sacred Doctor Peter to feed the sheep of Christ entrusted to thee throughout the whole habitable world, gathered together, not by force, but of their own accord.13. In order to end the schism, the bishops of the East signed the famous libellus of Pope Hormidas which stated:
Our first safety is to guard the rule of the right faith and to deviate in no wise from the ordinances of the Fathers; because we cannot pass over the statement of our Lord Jesus Christ who said: "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church." These words which were spoken, are proved by the effects of the deeds, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved without stain. ... Moreover, we accept and approve all the letters of blessed Leo the Pope, which he wrote regarding the Christian religion, just as we said before, following the Apostolic See in all things, and extolling all its ordinances. And, therefore, I hope that I may merit to be in the one communion with you, which the Apostolic See proclaims, in which there is the whole and true and perfect solidality of the Christian religion, promising than in the future the names of those separated from the communion of the Catholic Church, that is, those not agreeing with the Apostolic See, shall not be read during the sacred mysteries. But if I shall attempt in any way to deviate from my profession, I confess that I am a confederate in my opinion with those whom I have condemned. However, I have with my own hand signed this profession of mine, and to you, Hormisdas, the holy and venerable Pope of the City of Rome, I have directed it.14. This same profession was later signed by Patriarchs of Constantinople Epiphanius, John, Menna and by all the bishops at the Fourth Council of Constantinople.
Now of course none of these are infallible statements but they do illustrate what was commonly held, assertions to the contrary not withstanding. But we also have evidence from the councils themselves.
1. The Council of Ephesus, 431:
Philip, presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable Synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you, the holy members by our [or your] holy voices, ye joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessedness is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the Apostles, is blessed Peter the Apostle.2. The Council of Chalcedon, 451:
* * * Philip the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince (exarkos) and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation (qemelios) of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to to-day and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed pope Coelestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place, and us he sent to supply his place m this holy synod, which the most humane and Christian Emperors have commanded to assemble, bearing in mind and continually watching over the Catholic faith.
Paschasinus, the most reverend bishop and legate of the Apostolic See, stood up in the midst with his most reverend colleagues and said: We received directions at the hands of the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the Roman city, which is the head of all the churches ...3. The Third Council of Constantinople, 860:
* * * Lucentius, the most reverend bishop having the place of the Apostolic See, said: Let him give a reason for his judgment. For he undertook to give sentence against one over whom he had no jurisdiction. And he dared to hold a synod without the authority of the Apostolic See, a thing which had never taken place nor can take place.
* * * [The Roman Legates spoke together, and in their speech occurs the following (Col. 426:)]
Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness. Therefore let this most holy and great synod sentence the before mentioned Dioscorus to the canonical penalties.
THE LETTER OF POPE AGATHO.These statements were made in front of the entire assembly of bishops and recorded in the official acts of the councils in both Latin and Greek. Nor is there any record of anyone rejecting them. On the contrary we find these same sentiments expressed in the following letter of the Council of Chalcedon addressed to Pope Leo:
For [Peter] received from the Redeemer of all himself, by three commendations, the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church; under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his has never turned away from the path of truth in any direction of error, whose authority, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church, and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced, and followed in all things.
1.You are set as an interpreter to all of the voice of blessed Peter and to all you impart the blessings of that faith. And so we too, wisely taking you as our guide in all that is good, have shown to the sons of the Church their inheritance of the truth. … For if where two or three are gathered together in his name, he has said that he is in the midst of them, must he not have been much more particularly present with 520 priests who preferred to their country and their ease the spread of knowledge about him? Of all these you were the chief, as head to members, showing your goodwill in matters of organization. …Thus if we were to go back to what was believed by the undivided Church we would find ourselves accepting the primacy and universal jurisdiction of the pope.2. The enemy would have been like a wild beast outside the fold…if the late pontiff of the Alexandrians had not thrown himself to him for a prey….By his terror-won votes he aquitted Eutyches…. Besides all this he extended his fury even against him who had been charged with the custody of the vine by the Saviour–we refer to your holiness– and he intended to excommunicate one who was zealous to unite the body of the Church. …
4. We mention further that we have made certain other decisions also for the good management and stability of church affairs, as we are persuaded that your holiness will accept and ratify them when you are told. … We have also ratified the canon of the 150 holy fathers who met at Constantinople…which declares that after your most holy and apostolic see, the see of Constantinople shall have privileges, being placed second; for we are persuaded that, with your usual interest, you have often extended that apostolic radiance of yours even to the church of Constantinople also. … And so, deign, most holy and blessed father, to embrace as your own, and as lovable and agreeable to good order, the things we have decreed, for the removal of all confusion, and the confirmation of church order. … But we … recognized as fitting the confirmation of the honour by this universal council, and we confidently endorsed it,… knowing that every success of the children redounds to the parents. We therefore beg you to honour our decision by your assent, and as we have yielded agreement to the head in noble things, so may the head also fulfill what is fitting for the children. Thus … the see of Constantinople will receive its recompense for having always displayed such loyalty on matters of religion towards you, and for having so zealously linked itself to you in full agreement. (Council of Chalcedon, To Leo. A.D. 451. Leo, Ep. 98. [P.L. 54. 952; P.N.F. 12. 72A.])
Thanks old republic:)
“A quote from one Father is hardly evidence of a consensus patrum.”
Oh, you are absolutely right! I did a search of the 40 volumes of the Ante and Post Nicene Fathers using “Keys of the kingdom” and got 40 hits. Of those 40, 34 made the point that Origen makes, including a couple from Popes. Rather than post 40 snips, I posted one. There are other ways to do the search but the results tend to be the same or the Fathers say one thing in one place and another in another. +John Chrysostomos and even Blessed Augustine are prime examples of this (though not on the issue of the keys).
With all do respect, after 700 years of reading the Greek Fathers, the Orthodox Church still maintains that the Roman idea of immediate universal papal jurisdiction is outside the consensus patrum. Rome says otherwise, at least in the popular Western mind, but in light of the Vatican I box its in, one would hardly expect otherwise.
And yet, Father, the Pope and the Eastern hierarchs are talking reunion at such a level that the likes of the EP and Met. John of Pergamum, with whom I know you are familiar, seem to think its worth the effort. The Pope doesn’t expect us to accept his immediate universal jurisdiction, I sincerely doubt that the Orthodox hierarchs will anyway and I know that Moscow won’t. I know this because I speak with people who are involved. I also know that the Orthodox monastics and laity won’t, which is the ultimate deal breaker, just like it was after Florence. So if Rome is wedded to the idea of immediate universal jurisdiction, why is anyone, Orthodox or Roman, bothering?
No, Father, the popular concept of the Vatican I position is a dead duck if Rome wants even to keep its Eastern Rite sister churches let alone forge a reunion with Orthodoxy. Ask the next Melkite or Ukrainian or Orthodox priest or hierarch you run across, if you don’t believe me. Now it may well be that Rome is ready for failure in the reunion discussions. It may well be ready for a break with some of its Eastern Rite churches (it certainly is turning a blind eye to some very un Latin theology and praxis out there) all in an effort to stick with a certain conceptualization of Vatican I. Somehow or other, though, I doubt it.
I swore I just heard a rim shot...but it sounded as if it were in Greek.
' 
Modern western versions depict a different +Peter (in line with latter Catholic teaching)
Perhaps you should study the number of former Catholics who converted to Orthodoxy and now truly believe they have come home to Christ. We have so many converts we had to expand our church parking lot for the second time in 15 years. It's a great problem to have.
I didn't write that. I quoted it.
“AB: “first of all because there is no mention of the other Apostles receiving the keys”
I didn’t write that. I quoted it.”
My apologies. You are all too kind in your toleration of my fast advancing senility!
“I swore I just heard a rim shot...but it sounded as if it were in Greek.”
From me, the simple grandson of simple Greek peasants?
Heaven forefend!
Peter exercises unchallenged authority in asserting that a successor must be chosen for Judas, based on his interpretation of Scripture.
Acts 1:15-22The verses that Peter cites are not perspicuous.In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) and said, "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus— he was one of our number and shared in this ministry."
..."For," said Peter, "it is written in the book of Psalms,"
'May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it,' and, " 'May another take his place of leadership.'Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection."
Psalm 69:25May their place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in their tents.
Psalm 109:8
May his days be few; may another take his place of leadership.
Thanks for #145. I hadn’t read that before.
Or lets look at it another way. Are there a group of Fathers who deny that the primacy was given to St. Peter and is held by Rome, or state that there is no primacy in the Church, aside from such as Firmilian and Tertullian in his later years, who witness this belief in their fulminations against Roman decisions that went against them?
Where are those who should be opposing the “pretensions” of Popes Damasus, Siricius, Innocent, Boniface, Leo, Gelasius, Hormisdas, Gregory?
“Or lets look at it another way. Are there a group of Fathers who deny that the primacy was given to St. Peter and is held by Rome, or state that there is no primacy in the Church, aside from such as Firmilian and Tertullian in his later years, who witness this belief in their fulminations against Roman decisions that went against them?”
To the extent that the Fathers speak of primacy among the Patriarchs, I don’t think there are any. The issue is, what does that primacy mean.
“Where are those who should be opposing the “pretensions” of Popes Damasus, Siricius, Innocent, Boniface, Leo, Gelasius, Hormisdas, Gregory?”
The Ecumenical Councils ignored them on several occasions and were quite pointed in at least a couple of instances when defining the extent of the territorial and disciplinary authority of the Patriarchs. Sorry, got to run and will be off line until at least Sunday night unless I squeeze in more tonight.
all this fluff does nothing to advance your point.
it’s a fact that even the Popes knows full well there was no primacy of jurisdiction until very recently.
While still a brilliant theologian at the university, he endeared himself to the separated Eastern Orthodox with his famed “Ratzinger Formula.” In Graz (1976), the Roman Church dogmatician shocked the ecumenical world by declaring that “what was possible during a whole millennium can Christianly not be impossible today.” Consequently, “on the doctrine of the primacy (of the papacy), Rome must not require more from the East than what was formulated and lived out during the first millennium”–that is, prior to the 1054 Great Schism.
Ratzinger later clarified that his 1976 statement was not meant as a mere chronological return, but as a mutual commitment to confess the essential doctrinal consensus that had emerged as the ecclesial heritage of the first seven ecumenical councils of the undivided early church (through II Nicaea, 787).
In 1995, Pope John Paul II reiterated Ratzinger’s famed proposal in his encyclical, “That they all may be one.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.