Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cardinal Kasper On the Assyrian Church
Zenit ^ | 6/22/2007

Posted on 06/26/2007 2:29:41 AM PDT by 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.



TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Ecumenism; Orthodox Christian
KEYWORDS: assyrianorthodox; kaspar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 06/26/2007 2:29:44 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NYer; kosta50

Ecumenical ping!


2 posted on 06/26/2007 2:30:53 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus CINO-RINO GRAZIE NO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“The patriarch himself has his residence in Chicago.”

Chicago? Who knew?


3 posted on 06/26/2007 4:28:53 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley; NYer
How can their liturgy be "valid" when it does not have the part from the Last Supper (i.e. "Eat, this is my Body...)?

They also deny that BEV Mary is Theotokos, the Mother of God! That church also doesn't recognize marriage as a sacrament.

I am not surprised that the talks broke down. Someone inside the church tried to erase 1,600 years of that church's Nestorian heresy with a stroke of a pen.

That church is Nestorian in its beliefs. The bishop who was fired was probably doing it all on his own, and probably for his own benefit.

I am surprised the Catholic Church is actively accommodating this heretical church. It's this type "ecumenism" of JPII that makes Orthodox cringe and pull back just when everything seems to be going the right way.

No talks are needed. That church can simply recite the Creed and follow Eastern or Western rite liturgical life. This business of accommodation of heretics will never fly with the Orthodox Churches, whether they are Assyrian, Oriental Orthodox or what have you, until they reject their heresies (Monophyisitims, Nestorianism), recite the Creed and accept Chalcedon.

4 posted on 06/26/2007 6:15:54 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Interesting article.

I wonder how many people actually considered themselves Assyrian Christians, that is, with the Nestorian heresy intact.
From what I understand, many of them would consider themselves Assyrian Christians culturally and that the disbelief in Mary as the Mother of God might be incidental.

Good read!
It is VERY good to hear that the Vatican is continuing to try to bring other Christians, besides Roman Catholics, into a relationship of dialogue, cooperation, recognition and so on.

5 posted on 06/26/2007 6:54:25 AM PDT by starfish923 (Socrates: It's never right to do wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kosta50

The pattern appears to be a matter of drawing closer based upon those things the Churches hold in agreement and draw the line of separation based upon those elements where no agreement is possible.

I, for one, believe this is how the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Christian talks about reunification will eventually conclude.


6 posted on 06/26/2007 7:03:35 AM PDT by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: markomalley; sandyeggo; Pyro7480; Cronos; Siobhan; Father; tlRCta; Convert from ECUSA; visualops; ..

Worthy read ping!


7 posted on 06/26/2007 7:24:23 AM PDT by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
The Catholic Church cannot intervene in the internal affairs of another Church, but deeply regrets this unfortunate development.

Don't you think this is an interesting position coming from Rome?

8 posted on 06/26/2007 8:13:37 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
Don't you think this is an interesting position coming from Rome?

Not really, considering they are not in full communion.

9 posted on 06/26/2007 8:35:23 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
Not really, considering they are not in full communion.

I have my doubts about the probability of full communion until Jesus Christ returns, to set all to right. Think the Assyrian or Eastern Orthodox would remain in communion with Rome (assuming they become in full communion in the first place) if Rome tried to change Her position on that very point?

10 posted on 06/26/2007 8:48:10 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kosta50

yes,ecumenism with plain heretics is wrong!
recently i met a (russian) orthodox priest at my university catholic group, the first orthodox i have met. Quite interesting to hear his speech. We do agree on pretty much every theological point, but all we gotta get over are historical predjudices- which you guys some trouble with and the role of peter.
I also met another orthodox guy in one of my lectures. i was fiddling with my rosary and he came up to me and asked me about it. it changed things between us after that. not sure how, but the holy spirit was at work. maybe it was just knowing that there is a friendly around in a class with muslims!


11 posted on 06/26/2007 10:05:29 AM PDT by rogernz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rogernz
We do agree on pretty much every theological point, but all we gotta get over are historical predjudices- which you guys some trouble with and the role of peter.

Please forgive me if I misunderstand what you're saying, but your statement sounds insulting to me & I don't even have a dog in this particular hunt. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you more or less say that Eastern Orthodox must accept that they are/were solely in the wrong? Which historical prejudices are you offering to give up?

12 posted on 06/26/2007 10:26:44 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly

sorry, not trying to be polemic, but i do think they have far more complaints about rome than we do about them!


13 posted on 06/26/2007 10:44:15 AM PDT by rogernz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
Think the Assyrian or Eastern Orthodox would remain in communion with Rome (assuming they become in full communion in the first place) if Rome tried to change Her position on that very point [interfering in other Churches' affairs]?

I can't speak for the Assyrians, of course, but as far as the Orthodox are concerned the answer is — No! One bishop cannot interfere in the juristidciton of another bishop. A bishop can severe communion with another bishop if theological disagreement arises, but he can not "pull rank" on another bishop. The final authority in the church is a bishop; where a bishop is, the fullness of catholic and apostolic church resides.

14 posted on 06/26/2007 12:15:34 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rogernz
yes, ecumenism with plain heretics is wrong!

In fact, it spiritual death.

We do agree on pretty much every theological point, but all we gotta get over are historical predjudices- which you guys some trouble with and the role of peter

First, it's meaningless to speak of our prejudices considering that the original Church was Greek. The Greek Church hasn't changed.

Second, we do not agree on pretty much every theological point. Our theological disagreements are few, but they are fundamental; they reach to the core of our faith.

We differ on the original sin, Pneumatology, Mariology, state of the soul after physical death, doctrine of atonement, doctrine of grace, papal jurisdiction, and papal infallibility as defined by Vatican I.

These are not prejudices. Most of them are cultural and other misunderstandings based on different mindsets. Some of our disagreements come from the fact that neither side thinks outside the box.

Once the Latin mindset is taken into consideration, some of the doctrinal disagreements appear to diminish if not vanish, but the most important ones, the Latin view of the eternal precedence of the Spirit, the Immaculate Conception, the created grace, etc., remain unacceptable to the Orthodox. Talk about a few, but defining doctrines!

I also met another orthodox guy in one of my lectures. i was fiddling with my rosary and he came up to me and asked me about it

Some Orthodox (especially Protestant converts) don't know that we also have a "rosary" (sometimes made out of ordinary rope with a specific number of knots).

15 posted on 06/26/2007 12:36:45 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rogernz
sorry, not trying to be polemic, but i do think they have far more complaints about rome than we do about them!

It's not about which side has more complaints against the other or even which side has the better complaints. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Eastern Orthodox have held to the same position toward Rome & Peter from the beginning, first among equals. It allowed the Church to generally act as one for centuries, with an eye plucked out here, a foot chopped off there, but the body itself remaining intact.

If that form had remained, Rome would have had others equal to Her to keep Her in better balance & as the Church in the West expanded, those closest to populations would have been the ones with the power over the portion of the flock in the varied locals.

The Reformation may have never happened under those conditions, as it was in large part a response to a heavy hand, voices in the wilderness against an unbearable yoke unknown to those under the Patriarchies of the Eastern Orthodox.

16 posted on 06/26/2007 12:58:53 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
I can't speak for the Assyrians, of course, but as far as the Orthodox are concerned the answer is — No! One bishop cannot interfere in the juristidciton of another bishop. A bishop can severe communion with another bishop if theological disagreement arises, but he can not "pull rank" on another bishop.

That's what I thought. If a bishop severs communion with another, how does it affect communion with all of the others?

The final authority in the church is a bishop; where a bishop is, the fullness of catholic and apostolic church resides.

I thought findings of counsels had final authority, though they are or were only called in response to heresies invading a portion of the body. Am I wrong?

17 posted on 06/26/2007 1:24:41 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
That's what I thought. If a bishop severs communion with another, how does it affect communion with all of the others?

There would a Synod (Council) of bishops called by the patriarch or metropolitan of that particular church. The synod would review the grievances and the bishops would vote.

If the accused were to be found guilty of heresy, he and all those who agree with him would be given an opportunity to recant before the bishop(s) faced excommunication.

If the issue was a noncanonical practice, the Synod would organize a study group to investigate the nature and the need for a canonical change, whether it violated any scriptural tradition or whether it was in some ways contrary to the life of the Church in the past, whether it was in agreement or not with the Ecumenical Councils, and if there was readiness of the laity to accept or reject, etc.

The commission would present its findings and the Synod would vote. Until such time the old canon would be in force.

If a change was voted, it would have to be in agreement with the Church Holy Tradition, the Councils, the Bible and the Liturgical life of the Church all along. Once voted, it would be accepted as canon and all those who followed that canon would be in communion with each other.

I hope this answers your question.

General (Ecumenical) Councils proclaim dogma. They are binding for the whole Church. You are absolutely right that the purpose of these pronouncements was emergence of heresy that threatened the very foundation of our faith (Trinity, Christlogy, Mariology).

The problem the Orthodox have with poast-Schism Catholic dogmas is that some (like the Immaculate Conception) were proclaimed by the Pope bypassing the Synod, or perhaps pro forma addressing it with an accomplish fact, and that it was proclaimed without a visible or imminent heresy present.

18 posted on 06/26/2007 1:59:13 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

Drawing closer, FL, is not the same as re-union. I feel “drawn closer” to our Catholic brethren with Pope benedict XVI at the helm, but I don’t feel reunited with them.


19 posted on 06/26/2007 2:00:55 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
I hope this answers your question.

It does, thanx.

General (Ecumenical) Councils proclaim dogma. They are binding for the whole Church. You are absolutely right that the purpose of these pronouncements was emergence of heresy that threatened the very foundation of our faith (Trinity, Christlogy, Mariology).

I knew that's why the earliest ones were called & I saw how the Orthodox Church answered an attempt to bring some Calvinism into the Orthodox body.

The problem the Orthodox have with poast-Schism Catholic dogmas is that some (like the Immaculate Conception) were proclaimed by the Pope bypassing the Synod, or perhaps pro forma addressing it with an accomplish fact, and that it was proclaimed without a visible or imminent heresy present.

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

20 posted on 06/26/2007 2:58:44 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson